Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 May 2015
“Pro bono” is a familiar phrase in North American jurisdictions that generally refers to a lawyer’s provision of free legal services to indigent persons. The phrase “pro bono” has also come to imply a particular approach to a lawyer’s relationship to indigent persons, one that stresses the obligatory as opposed to the charitable nature of the services provided. To what extent has this phrase, and its conceptualisation of a lawyer’s role, been used in Asian jurisdictions? This article examines how one Asian jurisdiction, Singapore, conceptualises a lawyer’s relationship to indigent persons by examining newspaper usage of phrases describing legal services for indigent persons. The article argues that changes in usage over time, from free legal services and legal aid to inclusion of pro bono, coupled with increased discussions of access to justice, represent a shift to a more obligatory concept of indigent legal services. An obligatory conceptualisation potentially exerts greater pressure on lawyers to provide indigent legal services, but can also exert pressure to revise the historical lack of broad-based government funded criminal legal aid in Singapore.
1 See e.g. the discussion of American Bar Association Rule 6.1 in Rhode, Deborah L., Pro Bono in Principle and in Practice (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005) at 15–18.Google Scholar
2 Rhode, ibid. at 26-29.
3 See Abel, Richard L. & Lewis, Philip S. C., Lawyers in Society: An Overview (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1995)Google Scholar; Abel, Richard L. & Lewis, Philip S. C., Lawyers in Society, Volume 1: The Common Law World (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988)Google Scholar, Abel, Richard L. & Lewis, Philip S. C., Lawyers in Society, Volume 2: The Civil Law World (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988)Google Scholar, and Abel, Richard L. & Lewis, Philip S. C., Lawyers in Society, Volume 3: Comparative Theories (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1989)Google Scholar.
4 See Granfield, Robert & Mather, Lynn, eds., Private Lawyers and the Public Interest: The Evolving Role of Pro Bono in the Legal Profession (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009)Google Scholar; Rhode (2005), supra note 1 at 3-5, 100-24; and Sarat, Austin & Scheingold, Stuart, Cause Lawyering and the State in a Global Era (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Law Society of Singapore, Pro Bono Services Office, About Us, online: <http://probono.lawsociety.org.sg/About-Us/> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
6 “Pro-Bono Efforts to Get Boost as Part of New Legal Initiatives” Channel NewsAsia (6 January 2012), and at the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law, see NUS Law Curriculum Review Discussion Paper, November 2012, para. 42-44, online: <http://law.nus.edu.sg/about_us/curriculum_review/CRC_Discussion_Paper_2012.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
7 “S’pore Academy of Law Seeking Feedback on Proposed Pro Bono Scheme” Channel NewsAsia (4 March 2013), online: < http://news.xin.msn.com/en/singapore/spore-academy-of-law-seeking-feedback-on-proposed-pro-bono-scheme>.
8 Rajah, Jothie, Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Chan, Gary, “The Right of Access to Justice: Judicial Discourse in Singapore and Malaysia” (2007) 2(1) As. J.C.L. Article 2.Google Scholar
9 See Wu, Tang Hang, “The Legal Representation of the Singaporean Home and the Influence of the Common Law” (2007) 37(1) Hong Kong L.J. 81.Google Scholar
10 Chen, Jianlin, “Singapore’s Culture War over Section 377A: Through the Lens of Public Choice and Multilingual Research” (2013) 38(1) Law & Soc. Inquiry 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 See Keenleyside, T. A., Burton, B. E., & Soderlund, W. C., “The Press and Foreign Policy: Canadian Newspaper Coverage of Relations with the United States, October-December 1982” (1986) 41 Int’l J. 189 Google Scholar; Erickson, Christopher L. & Mitchell, Daniel D. B., “Information on Strikes and Union Settlements: Patterns of Coverage in a ‘Newspaper of Record’” (1996) 49(3) Industrial & Labor Relations Review 395 Google Scholar; Chenault, Scott, “The New Ice Age? A Content Analysis of Methamphetamine” (2012) 12 Journal of the Institute of Justice & International Studies 15 Google Scholar; and Lowrie, Karen, Greenberg, Michael & Waishwell, Lynn, “Hazards, Risk and the Press: A Comparative Analysis of Newspaper Coverage of Nuclear and Chemical Weapons Sites” (2000) 11 Risk: Health, Safety & Environment 49.Google Scholar
12 Evans, Sandra S. & Lundman, Richard J., “Newspaper Coverage of Corporate Price Fixing” (1983) 21(4) Criminol. 529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Garber, Steven & Bower, Anthony G., “Newspaper Coverage of Automobile Product Liability Verdicts” (1999) 33(1) Law & Soc’y Rev. 93 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hinds, Lyn, “Three Strikes and You’re Out in the West: A Study of Newspaper Coverage of Crime Control in Western Australia” (2000) 17(2) Current Issues in Criminal Justice 239.Google Scholar
13 Erickson & Mitchell (1996), supra note 11; Garber & Bower, ibid; and Lowrie, Greenberg & Waishwell (2000), supra note 11.
14 Chenault (2012), supra note 11; Keenleyside, Burton, & Soderlund (1986), supra note 11; Evans & Lundman (1983), supra note 12.
15 Occasional exceptions to the research focus on The Straits Times are, for example, made for The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser, because it contains relevant newspaper coverage in a time of relatively scant coverage, and for the Singapore Monitor (Faezah Ismail, “Society’s Legal Aid Service Will Not Be Training Ground” Singapore Monitor (24 August 1984) at 4), because it appears to be one of the first discussions in the Singapore press regarding the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme, a subject of some prominence in The Straits Times coverage.
16 Gerald Franics de Silva, The Straits Times: 1945-1975 (B.A. Honors Thesis, Department of History, National University of Singapore, 1987/88) at ii.
17 Ibid.
18 Turnbull, C. M., Dateline Singapore: 150 Years of the Straits Times (Singapore: Singapore Press Holdings, 1995)Google Scholar, “Bibliography” at 392.
19 Ibid.
20 Singapore Press Holdings, Our Businesses, Newspapers, The Straits Times/The Sunday Times, online <http://www.sph.com.sg/our-businesses/newspapers/the-straits-times-the-sunday-times/>.
21 de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 14.
22 Turnbull (1995), supra note 18 at 70, 81.
23 See the documentation of differences in the opinions expressed in Malay and Chinese language newspapers in Chen (2013), supra note 10 at 118-20.
24 de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 2-4, 8-9, 16-20.
25 See Turnbull (1995), supra note 18 at 71; de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 14-15.
26 De Silva notes that particularly after Singapore’s exit from the Federation of Malayan, political leadership in Kuala Lumpur became concerned about the newspaper’s management by European elites based in Singapore, resulting in an amendment of the Corporations Act which caused the newspaper to withdraw management shares (de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 43-45). In the 1970s, Singapore enacted a series of laws “to ensure no foreign influence on the mass media,” including provisions requiring that directors of newspapers be Singapore citizens and creating ordinary and management shares, with management shares to be held only by citizens or corporations approved of by the Minister (de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 72, and 68-76; see the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act, 206 (Rev. Ed. Sing. 2002), s. 10, and see also Broadcasting Act, Cap. 28 (Rev. Ed. Sing. 2012), Part X).
27 Lee, Kevin Tan Yew, “A Short Legal and Constitutional History of Singapore”, in Tan, Kevin Y. L., ed., The Singapore Legal System (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1999) at 30.Google Scholar
28 Ibid. at 35.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid. at 40.
31 Ibid. at 41.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid. at 44-45.
34 Ibid. at 45.
35 Ibid.
36 Ibid. at 46.
37 Turnbull (1995), supra note 18 at 151; de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at 7, 26-27, 29.
38 de Silva (1987/88), supra note 16 at iv.
39 Ibid. at 61-76.
40 Chenault (2012), supra note 11 at 23.
41 Erickson & Mitchell (1996), supra note 11 at 400.
42 The primary database used to access The Straits Times was <http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/> (formerly <newspapers.nl.sg>), a free full text online database. However, given limited coverage in more recent years, the usage patterns reported in this paper for the years 1990-2013 originate primarily from the Factiva database. Different databases do generate different usage figures. Also, Factiva references do not provide page numbers for articles, hence the lack of page numbers for articles retrieved this database.
43 The <http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/> database indicates that the phrase “in forma pauperis” appears in 115 articles from 1907 (“Baron’s Vow of Poverty” The Straits Times (25 June 1907) at 7) to 1973 (“Family is refused leave to appeal to Privy Council” The Straits Times (20 February 1973) at 5).
44 See Cappelletti, Mauro, Gordley, James & Johnson, Earl, Toward equal Justice: A Comparative Study of Legal Aid in Modern Societies (Milano: A. Giuffre; Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana, 1975)Google Scholar.
45 See e.g. the academic Abel, Richard L., “State, Market, Philanthropy, and Self-Help as Legal Services Delivery Mechanisms” in Granfield, Robert & Mather, Lynn, eds., Private Lawyers and the Public Interest: The Evolving Role of Pro Bono in the Legal Profession (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) at 304 Google Scholar; the organisational view of the International Bar Association’s IBA pro bono declaration (16 October 2008) at para. G, online: <http://www.ibanet.org/PPID/Constituent/ProBono_Accs_Justice/Default.aspx>; and the newspaper article by Grania Langdon-Down, “Pro bono – Minding the Gap” The Law Society Gazette (25 October 2012), online: <http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/67961.article>.
46 Rhode (2005), supra note 1 at 101.
47 Ibid. at 25.
48 Ibid. at 37.
49 Matthews, E. J. T. & Oulton, A. D. M., Legal Aid and Advice under the Legal Aid Acts 1949 to 1964 (London: Butterworths, 1971) at 9.Google Scholar
50 Egerton, Robert, Legal Aid (London: Kegan Paul, Trench Trubner & Co., 1945) at 6.Google Scholar
51 11 Henry VII c. 12.
52 Matthews & Oulton (1971), supra note 49 at 10-11.
53 Ibid. at 11.
54 Egerton (1945), supra note 50 at 7.
55 Ibid.
56 Harry Lease, M. Jr., “Legal Aid in England and Wales” (1988) 71(6) Judicature 345 Google Scholar at 345.
57 Goriely, Tamara, “The Development of Criminal Legal Aid in England & Wales” in Young, Richard & Wall, David, eds., Access to Criminal Justice (Great Britain: Blackstone Press, 1996) at 30.Google Scholar
58 Ibid. at 31.
59 Ibid.
60 Stephen, J. F., A History of the Criminal Law of England, Volume 1 (London: Macmillan and Company, 1883) at 428 Google Scholar, as cited by Goriely (1996), supra note 57 at 32.
61 Goriely (1996), supra note 57 at 36-37.
62 Ibid. at 37.
63 Ibid. at 37-38.
64 Ibid. at 39.
65 Ibid. at 39-40.
66 Stamps, Norman L., “Legal Aid in England” (1952) 32 Oregon L. Rev. 10 Google Scholar at 11.
67 Goriely (1996), supra note 57 at 41.
68 Stamps (1952), supra note 66.
69 Jowitt, Vicount, “Legal Aid in England” (1949) XXIV New York University Law Quarterly Review 757 Google Scholar at 758-59.
70 Report of the Committee on Legal Aid and Legal Advice in England and Wales (1945) Cmd. 6641, at 5 para. 23.
71 Ibid. at 5 para. 24.
72 Lord Parker of Waddington, “The Development of Legal Aid in England since 1949” (1962) 48 A.B.A. J. 1029 Google Scholar at 1029.
73 Goriely (1996), supra note 57 at 43.
74 Ibid. at 42-43.
75 Stamps (1952), supra note 66 at 23.
76 Waddington (1962), supra note 72 at 1033.
77 Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance 1956, No. 19 of 1956.
78 Ying, Yeo Hwee, “Provision of Legal Aid in Singapore” in Tan, Kevin Y. L., ed., The Singapore Legal System, 2nd ed. (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1999) 446 Google Scholar at 448.
79 Ibid.
80 Ibid.
81 References to parties proceeding in forma pauperis appear regularly in case reports of the time, from the 1889 Straits Law Journal (see Sariah, Smail and Manood v. Jayah and Mymomah [1889] SLJ 36 (Straits Settlement Court of Appeal)) to the 1998 Malayan Law Journal (Ghazali bin Mat Ghani v Public Prosecutor [1998] 2 MLJ 675) (Court of Appeal Kuala Lumpur).
82 See Joseph, George, “Solved: Poor Box Fund mystery” The Straits Times (7 June 1976) at 7.Google Scholar
83 Yeo, H. Y., “Assessing the State of Civil Legal Aid in Singapore” (1992) 41(4) I.C.L.Q. 875 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 876.
84 Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance, supra note 77, Part III.
85 Ibid., Part II.
86 Ibid., Part IV.
87 Ibid., s. 1.
88 See Yeo (1999), supra note 78 at 449, n. 17, and Sylvia Lim & Ong Keng Sen, “A Time to Confront the Malaise: A Review of Post-Graduate Legal Training in Singapore” 6 Sing. L. Rev. 87 at 95, n. 23.
89 See Heong, Stanley Yeo Meng, “Unrepresented Defendants in the Subordinate Criminal Courts of Singapore” (1981) 23 Malaya L. Rev. 41 Google Scholar at 50-51; Heong, Stanley Yeo Meng, “Re-Opening the Case for Criminal Legal Aid in Singapore” (November 1983) The Malayan L. J. cxxiv Google Scholar; Yeo (1992), supra note 83 at 877-78 and 890; Bhaskaran s/o Sivasamy, “The Criminal Appellate System in Singapore” (1995) 16 Sing. L. Rev. 319 Google Scholar at 336; K. S. Rajah, “The Hour of Criminal Legal Aid” (August 2008) Singapore Law Gazette, online: <http://www.lawgazette.com.sg/2008-8/> (last accessed 28 July 2014); “Pro Bono Feature: CLAS – Defending the Cause of the Less Fortunate” Singapore Law Review Blog Archive (1 April 2009), online: <http://www.singaporelawreview.org/2009/04/pro-bono-feature-clas-defending-the-cause-of-the-less-fortunate/> (last accessed 28 July 2014). See also the brief commentary on the right to counsel and criminal legal aid in Valentine Selvam Winslow, Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review: Administrative & Constitutional Law (2001) s. 1.19-1.20, and in Yung, Chin Tet, “Remaking the Evidence Code: Search for Values” (2009) 21 Singapore Academy of Law Journal 52 Google Scholar at 65-68. Cf Susheela Tiwary, Legal Aid in Criminal Cases: A Case for Reform? (1981) National University of Singapore Law Thesis (on file with author).
90 See Chin (2009), ibid. at 66.
91 Yeo (1992), supra note 83 at 875, n. 2.
92 Remarks of then Acting Minister for Social Affairs, Dr. Ahmad Mattar, noted in Fernandez, Ivan & Hoong, Ng Weng, “Lawyers for the Needy…” The Straits Times (24 April 1983) at 1.Google Scholar
93 Legal Aid and Advice Act (Cap. 160) Act 20 of 1995.
94 See Bhaskaran s/o Sivasamy, supra note 89 at 336.
95 Yeo (1999), supra note 78 at 463.
96 Singapore Parliamentary Reports, 7 July 1995, Second Reading, Legal Aid and Advice Bill, column 1345.
97 Ibid. at column 1346-1347.
98 Ibid. at column 1349-1350. For a discussion of similar orientations in the United States, see Marshall, Lawrence C., “Gideon’s Paradox” (2004) 73 Fordham L. Rev. 955 Google Scholar at 961.
99 “Supreme Court: Information for Accused Persons”, online: <http://app.supremecourt.gov.sg/default.aspx?pgID=84> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
100 Ibid.
101 See Law Society of Singapore, Pro Bono Services Office, Criminal Legal Aid Scheme, online: <http://probono.lawsociety.org.sg/Help-for-Public/personal-legal-issue/CriminalLegalAidScheme1/> (last accessed 28 July 2014), and CLAS Pamphlet – English Version, online: <http://probono.lawsociety.org.sg/Documents/Help%20public_hyperlinked%20files/CLAS_brochure_eng.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
102 CLAS Pamphlet, ibid.
103 See CLAS Pamphlet, ibid. Applicants are queried about their income, savings, property and other assets. To pass the income test, single applicants must earn less than S$1,300 net per month and married applicants must have a combined income of less than S$1,700 net per month. Where the married applicant has dependants (excluding spouse), an allowance of S$160 is added to the S$1,700 net monthly ceiling.
104 The Law Society of Singapore, Annual Report 2013, at 54, online: <http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/Portals/0/AboutUs/AnnualReport/2013/The%20Law%20Society%20of%20Singapore%20Annual%20Report%202013.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
105 Ibid.
106 Ibid. at 17, online: <http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/Portals/0/AboutUs/AnnualReport/2013/The%20Law%20Society%20of%20Singapore%20Annual%20Report%202013.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
107 See Subordinate Courts Workplan 2010, 26 February 2010, “Access To Quality Justice For All”, online: <http://app.subcourts.gov.sg/Data/Files/File/Workplans/Workplan2010/CJ’s%20Keynote%20Address%20Feb%202010.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014), Keynote Address By The Honourable Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong at para. 2, where the Chief Justice noted that in criminal matters, “the Subordinate Courts have instituted a centralised referral system to facilitate the referral by the Community Court of undefended cases involving young, mentally ill and intellectually challenged offenders for pro bono representation.” The system will refer remandees in the Community Court to the Law Society Pro Bono Office, which will decide whether to refer the cases to the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (“CLAS”) or to the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (“ACLS”). The Chief Justice also noted the existence of a dock brief system for an indigent party in forma pauperis, which “has been put in place with ACLS to activate lawyers to act for unrepresented accused persons.”
108 Ibid. at para. 6, online: <http://app.subcourts.gov.sg/Data/Files/File/Workplans/Workplan2010/CJ’s%20Keynote%20Address%20Feb%202010.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014). See also Kimberly Spykerman, “New initiatives at Subcourts” The Straits Times (26 February 2010), online: <http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne±News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20100226-201117.html> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
109 State Courts Singapore, About Criminal Justice, Courts, Community Courts, online: <http://app.subcourts.gov.sg/criminal/page.aspx?pageid=10819> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
110 Vijayan, K. C., “Ensuring Legal Aid Is Within Reach” The Straits Times (28 February 2009)Google Scholar.
111 See Sim, Christine & Feng, Tan Zhi, “The Paradox of Legal Aid in Singapore: Civil Legal Aid without Criminal Legal Aid” (2012) 30 Sing. L. Rev. 165 Google Scholar, and Michael Hwang, President, The Law Society of Singapore, “A Conversation with the Chief Justice of Russia” (May 2010) The Singapore Law Gazette 6 at 6, online: <http://www.lawgazette.com.sg/2010-05/> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
112 Chase, Milton, “Battle for Survival for Lawyers in United States” The Straits Times (17 July 1978) at 31.Google Scholar
113 “‘Free Legal Aid for the Poor’ Call by Lawyer” The Straits Times (1 August 1962) at 7.
114 Hubbard, Alan, “Revolutionary Changes Mooted for British Courts” The Straits Times (9 June 1988) at 3.Google Scholar
115 “UK Announces New Plans for Legal Shake-Up” The Straits Times (21 July 1989) at 11.
116 “New Mentor Scheme Launched for Young Lawyers” The Straits Times (11 January 2000).
117 See Untitled (“China”) The Straits Times (8 August 1854) at 5, “Pinang” The Straits Times (24 April 1855) at 5, “Princely Beggar Sent to Jail” The Straits Times (15 December 1904) at 6, and “Policies of Assurance” The Straits Times (16 September 1908) at 10.
118 See “Amazing Story” The Straits Times (22 September 1905) at 12, and “Families of Seow and Teo appeal for aid” The Straits Times (4 June 1988) at 22.
119 “Committed for Trial” The Straits Times (3 March 1908) at 10.
120 Ibid.
121 “Novel Suggestions Before the Commission: Free Legal Advice” The Straits Times (9 April 1910), at 10.
122 In England, the 1857 Matrimonial Causes Act allowed ordinary people to divorce, and prior to that divorce was extremely difficult and expensive, requiring an Act of Parliament. Under the 1857 law, a woman seeking a divorce on the grounds of adultery still had to prove an additional fault such as rape or incest. See “A brief history of divorce” The Guardian (18 September 2009), online: <http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/sep/19/divorce-law-history> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
123 On legal aid for divorce, see also “The London Letter” The Straits Times (19 December 1929) at 6.
124 “The Offence of Champerty” The Straits Times (11 February 1913) at 11.
125 See “Touting Lawyers” The Straits Times (19 March 1934) at 13, “Work of a Legal Aid Society” The Straits Times (14 November 1932) at 5, and “Notes of the Day” The Straits Times (20 March 1934) at 10.
126 See the reference to the Labourer’s Legal Aid Fund in “Notes of the Day” The Straits Times (8 June 1929) at 8.
127 “Law for Nothing: Scheme to Give Legal Aid to Poor Persons” The Straits Times (4 June 1914).
128 The rules were enacted as Rules of the Supreme Court (Poor Persons) 1913 (Mathews & Oulton (1971), supra note 49 at 13, n.10).
129 Ibid.
130 Supra note 70 at 2.
131 Pollock, Seton, Legal Aid – The First 25 Years (London: Oyez Publishing, 1975) at 12.Google Scholar
132 Supra note 127.
133 Supra note 70 at 2.
134 Supra note 70 at 2.
135 Ibid.
136 See supra, Section II(C).
137 “Required Legal Aid: Revenue Officer Alleged to Have Taken Bribe” The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser (27 October 1934) at 6.
138 “Squatters to seek aid” The Singapore Free Press (14 August 1950) at 1.
139 “New Flying Standard” The Straits Times (23 April 1936) at 18.
140 “Crown Spends More on Legal Aid for Accused” The Straits Times (16 February 1940) at 14.
141 Ibid.
142 Ibid.
143 Ibid.
144 Tan, Kevin Y. L., Marshall of Singapore: A Biography (Singapore: ISEAS Publishing, 2008) at 358 Google Scholar, 318-20.
145 “Apathy Can Hold Back Legal Plan” The Straits Times (14 November 1951) at 4.
146 “Legal Plan Welcomed” The Straits Times (17 November 1951) at 7.
147 “Free Legal Plan Will be a ‘tricky business’” The Straits Times (6 January 1952) at 9.
148 Ibid.
149 “Free Legal Aid Scheme ‘Could Start At Once’” The Straits Times (25 January 1952) at 10.
150 “Free Legal Help Is Being Worked on Now’” The Straits Times (23 April 1955) at 8.
151 “Free Legal Aid” The Straits Times (12 June 1956) at 6.
152 Ibid.
153 “A Scheme That Is More Maligned Than Prodigal” The Straits Times (20 August 1956) at 6.
154 “Legal Aid Shock: Lawyers Urged: Don’t Work This ‘Preposterous’ Bill” The Straits Times (8 August 1956) at 1.
155 “Mr. Lim Explains to the Lawyers: ‘Legal Aid Needs Your Co-operation’” The Straits Times (10 August 1956) at 9.
156 Tan (2008), supra note 142 at 318.
157 “The Lawyers’ Boycott” The Straits Times (9 August 1956) at 6, and Tan (2008), supra note 142 at 319.
158 Supra note 152.
159 Supra note 153.
160 Ibid.
161 “Free Legal Aid: Lim Sees Bar Committee Today” The Straits Times (23 August 1956) at 8.
162 “Mr. Marshall and the Legal Aid Bill” The Straits Times (20 February 1957) at 8.
163 Ibid.
164 Ibid.
165 Ibid.
166 “Legal Aid: Lim and the Bar Sort Things Out” The Straits Times (24 August 1956) at 5.
167 See e.g. “Fee Talks Delay Free Legal Aid” The Straits Times (4 July 1957) at 9, and “No Decision on Legal Aid” The Singapore Free Press (10 October 1957) at 2.
168 “Settled at Last – Legal Aid Lawyers’ Fees” The Straits Times (23 March 1958) at 4.
169 “Applicants Rush for Free Legal Aid” The Straits Times (20 July 1958) at 11.
170 “Legal Aid: ‘A Serious Gap Bridged’” The Straits Times (23 January 1961) at 5.
171 Pillai, R. G., “Now Free Legal Aid for Debtors: It’s an Offense to Collect Old Rates of Interest” The Straits Times (6 September 1959) at 11.Google Scholar
172 “Legal Aid Bureau at Your Service: Short of Divorce, You Can Sue Him for Non-Maintenance” The Straits Times (8 April 1969) at 12.
173 Supra note 167.
174 “15 Get Legal Aid from Government” The Straits Times (2 September 1958) at 9.
175 Mee, Tan Kin, “‘Improve the Legal Aid System’ Call” The Straits Times (14 May 1970) at 5.Google Scholar
176 Ibid.
177 Ibid.
178 Ibid.
179 “Extending Legal Aid in S’pore” The Straits Times (17 May 1970) at 10.
180 Ibid.
181 “‘Legal Aid Bureau Needs Backing Lawyers’” The Straits Times (4 July 1974) at 6.
182 “Expanded Legal Aid Will Benefit Public” The Straits Times (5 April 1976) at 12.
183 “Criminal Cases and Legal Aid” The Straits Times (20 April 1976) at 10.
184 Ibid.
185 “Criminals’ Should Also Get Legal help from the Bureau” The Straits Times (23 April 1976) at 16.
186 “Extending Legal Aid in S’pore”, supra note 177, “Top Legal Brains Due for Law Meet” The Straits Times (15 April 1971) at 9, “Students on the Go” The Straits Times (6 May 1971) at 12, “Legal Aid Clinics Plan Gets Support at Law Seminar” The Straits Times (8 July 1971) at 4, “Legal Aid Clinic ‘Stepping Stone’ to Private Practice” The Straits Times (10 July 1971) at 20, “Student Participation in Legal Aid” The Straits Times (29 July 1971) at 12, and “New Visiting Law Prof” The Straits Times (20 January 1972) at 15.
187 “Muslim Legal Aid Clinic to Be Set Up” The Straits Times (3 June 1976) at 11.
188 “Temple to Open Its Second Free Legal Clinic” The Straits Times (30 April 1989) at 20.
189 “Legal Aid Offer to Troops: ‘Yes, If It’s Free’” The Straits Times (14 June 1977) at 13, and “Free Legal Advice” The Straits Times (14 June 1977) at 14.
190 “Society: Hard to Give Free Legal Aid to Soldiers” The Straits Times (13 July 1977) at 9.
191 Chong, Elena, “Needy Accused Can Get Free Psychiatric Help” The Straits Times (30 April 1989) at 20.Google Scholar
192 “‘Start Free Legal Aid Clinics in C-Centres’ Call to Law Society” The Straits Times (3 September 1978) at 8.
193 Ibid.
194 See Ng Weng Hoong, “Case for Legal Aid for All Accused of Crimes” The Straits Times (11 December 1982) at 7, “The Case of the Represented versus the Unrepresented” The Straits Times (12 January 1983) at 18, Fernandez & Ng, supra note 92, and “Helping Those in Need to Get Free Legal Help” The Straits Times (8 January 1984) at 15.
195 See Yeo (1981), supra note 89; Yeo (1983), supra note 89.
196 “Legal Aid for the Needy” The Straits Times (14 March 1984) at 1.
197 Ibid.
198 See also K. C. Vijayan, “More to Qualify for Legal Aid” The Straits Times (15 July 2005) (Professor Yeo’s study “led to the start of the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme in 1985, which a group from the Law Society and Professor Yeo helped put in place”).
199 See Sim & Tan (2012), supra note 111 at 166, and Cheah Wui Ling, who includes CLAS as well as the Association for Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (ACLS), in “Developing a People-Centered Justice in Singapore: In Support of Pro Bono and Innocence Work” (2013) 80 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1429 Google Scholar at 1430.
200 Faezah Ismail, “Society’s Legal Aid Service Will Not Be Training Ground” Singapore Monitor (24 August 1984) at 4; the Singapore Monitor is cited here as it appears to be one of the first references in the Singapore press regarding the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme; see also “Law Society Should Not Drag Its Feet on Legal Aid Plan” Singapore Monitor (12 December 1983) at 17.
201 “Plugging the Legal Gap” The Straits Times (8 July 1985) at 12.
202 Ibid.
203 Ibid.
204 “Free Legal Aid for the Needy” The Straits Times (2 September 1986) at 1.
205 “Legal Aid Pilot Scheme Starts Tomorrow” The Straits Times (1 September 1985) at 20.
206 “Legal Aid Now for Robbery Cases, Too” The Straits Times (24 October 1985) at 14.
207 “Free Legal Aid for the Needy”, supra note 202.
208 Ibid.
209 “Legal Aid Scheme for Criminal Cases a Success” The Straits Times (4 August 1988) at 16.
210 Ibid.
211 “The First Reference Appears to Be ‘Untitled’” The Straits Times (4 April 1849) at 3, a letter to the editor regarding dusty roads from “A CLOUD”.
212 See e.g. “Retrenchment” The Straits Times (10 June 1922) at 8 and “Rare Clean-Up” The Straits Times (13 July 1965) at 10.
213 See “Price of Firewood” The Straits Times (23 July 1926) at 10.
214 “Jellyfish Say O.K.” The Straits Times (7 November 1949) at 4.
215 See “Merchants Should Be Consulted” The Straits Times (19 November 1936) at 13, “Pawnshop Rates” The Straits Times (12 March 1949) at 9, “Noises” The Straits Times (6 September 1940) at 8, “Why Blame the Govt.?” The Straits Times (17 May 1957) at 8, “Time for a New Bridge” The Straits Times (12 March 1966) at 11, “A Capital Sight, That Weekend Mess in the Gardens” The Straits Times (12 March 1966) at 11, “Untitled” The Straits Times (21 June 1974) at 14, and “Give Us the Numbers” The Straits Times (1 March 1984) at 17.
216 See “British Malaya” The Straits Times (29 July 1924) at 10.
217 See “Training at The Kandang Kerbau Hospital” The Straits Times (29 April 1957) at 6.
218 “This Word Is Misused” The Straits Times (3 August 1957) at 12.
219 “Medals” The Straits Times (3 July 1937) at 12.
220 See “Motor Lights” The Straits Times (28 August 1923) at 10.
221 “Clarification Plea” The Straits Times (16 February 1979) at 17; see also “Untitled” The Straits Times (19 June 1976) at 19 (cancelled appearance date for subpoenaed witness).
222 See “Untitled” The Straits Times (7 July 1989) at 2, “Untitled” The Straits Times (11 July 1989) at 28, and “Should real names be used?” The Straits Times (11 July 1989) at 3.
223 See Cheong Suk-Wai, “‘Creative Cynics’ Take Up Gauntlet” The Straits Times (13 October 2000) (“The inaugural Pro Bono Campaign Of The Year Award will recognise the ad that aims to build a better world”), and “Recreation Galore” The Straits Times (24 October 2004) at 26.
224 See Jeremy Lim, “About Pro Bono” The Straits Times (10 June 2012) and Editorial, “Time for More to Do Pro Bono Work” (18 December 2012).
225 Chase (1978), supra note 112.
226 “Singaporean Lawyer Wins US Award for Helping Underprivileged” The Straits Times (13 August 1990).
227 Ibid.
228 “Judges and Lawyers Must Be Above Suspicion: Anwar” The Straits Times (8 December 1995) at 38.
229 “New Mentor Scheme Launched for Young Lawyers” The Straits Times (11 January 2000).
230 Kelvin Wong, “Lawyer Fights for Ex-NMP – for Free” The Straits Times (30 July 2003).
231 Ibid.
232 See Table 2.
233 See Table 3.
234 “‘Free Legal Aid for the Poor’ Call by Lawyer” The Straits Times (1 August 1962) at 7.
235 Hubbard, Alan, “Revolutionary Changes Mooted for British Courts” The Straits Times (9 June 1988) at 3.Google Scholar
236 “UK Announces New Plans for Legal Shake-Up” The Straits Times (21 July 1989).
237 Ibid.
238 See “CJ: Quality Work Is Road to Success” The Straits Times (15 March 1990) (quality of legal service is the basis of rule of law and access to justice, but there is a danger of moving away from professionalism and placing profit before service); Mathew Pereira, “Hearing Fees Will Not Restrict Access to Justice, Say CJ” The Straits Times (16 May 1993) (access to justice is already restricted because of high lawyer fees); Richard Goh Soo Hock (Forum Letter), “Cap Legal Fees to Make Justice Accessible to All” The Straits Times (23 November 1993); Tin Keng Seng (Forum Letter), “Capping Legal Fees Won’t Put Justice within Reach of Most” The Straits Times (26 November 1993); Frances Gibb, “No-Win, No-Fee Scheme for British Lawyers Facing Hurdles” (19 March 1994) (reviewing the progress of ongoing reform of lawyer fees in Britain); Brendan Pereira, “Rising Cost of Justice” (27 November 1994) The Straits Times (lawyer costs rising but some working Singaporeans cannot afford a lawyer, leaving them with little access to justice); “Blue-Print for the 21st Century” (5 April 1998) (while “reviewing the Subordinate Courts’ annual workplan, then Chief Justice Yong Pung How noted the expense of litigation itself can often be a real bar to access to justice”).
239 See Brendan Pereira, ibid. (“although there is free legal help, few would pass the means test at the Legal Aid Bureau, which gives help in civil cases”).
240 Peter Cuthbert Low (Forum Letter), “Conveyancing fees are reasonable” The Straits Times (13 August 1994).
241 Tan Ooi Boon, “Law Still Grey Area for Many People” The Straits Times (13 July 1998).
242 Andrew Phang, “Your ‘Legal Friend’ May Be His Worst Enemy” The Straits Times (29 November 1998).
243 George Lim, “Letter – Lawyers Are Keeping Pace with Change” The Straits Times (19 May 1999).
244 “New Mentor Scheme Launched for Young Lawyers” The Straits Times (11 January 2000).
245 “Adapt to Meet Needs of High-Tech Singapore: CJ” The Straits Times (7 January 1990).
246 See “In the Service of Justice and the Taxpayer” The Straits Times (17 January 1993) (excerpts of then Chief Justice Yong Pung How’s speech at the opening of the legal year); Pereira, Mathew, “Hearing Fees Will Not Restrict Access to Justice, say CJ” The Straits Times (16 May 1993)Google Scholar; and “When, Why and How” The Straits Times (19 June 1993).
247 See Warren Fernandez, “Should Hearing Fees Be Imposed?” The Straits Times (19 June 1993) (debate between Mr. Peter Low, then President of the Law Society, and lawyer Shriniwas Rai); and Brendan Pereira, “A Friend of the Underdog” The Straits Times (23 January 1994) (interview with Mr. Peter Cuthbert Low, then President of the Law Society).
248 “Singapore’s Legal System Rated Best in the World” The Straits Times (26 September 1993) (World Competitiveness Report 1993); see also Pereira, Brendan, “Justice System Here Top in Asia, 9th in World” The Straits Times (19 September 1995) (World Competitiveness Report 1995)Google Scholar; Pereira, Brendan, “Singapore’s Justice System Ranked 4th in the World” The Straits Times (4 June 1996) (World Competitiveness Yearbook 1996)Google Scholar; Boon, Tan Ooi, “S’pore Justice System Ranked Too Low, Says Don” The Straits Times (26 September 1996)Google Scholar.
249 Brendan Pereira, “CJ – Courts Must Be Accessible to All” The Straits Times (26 February 1995) (access to courts should be for all litigants, not only those who have legal representation); Lim Li Hsien, “Sub-Courts Aim to Reach World Class in 21st Century” The Straits Times (2 March 1997).
250 Tan Ooi Boon, “IT Can Make Courts More Consumer-Friendly – CJ” The Straits Times (25 September 1996).
251 Lim Li Hsien, “A Centre to Talk It out – Instead of Fighting” The Straits Times (17 August 1997).
252 “Has the Price of Justice Gone Up? – MPs Concerned Over New Appeal Limits” The Straits Times (27 November 1998); Yap Kim Sang, “Letter – The Right to Appeal Is Sacred” The Straits Times (4 December 1998), and Tan Ooi Boon & Lim Seng Jin, “Opening of Legal Year – Appeal Limit Not Meant to Deny Access to Justice, Says CJ” The Straits Times (10 January 1999).
253 “CJ – Sub Courts’ Progress Good” The Straits Times (11 January 2000); Karen Wong, “Soon – ‘Virtual’ Resolution of E-commerce Disputes” The Straits Times (30 April 2000); “Read about Cases in Family Court” The Straits Times (30 September 2000); Tan Ooi Boon, “No Slowing Down the Courts – CJ” The Straits Times (8 October 2001); “Aim for All to Have Access to Justice – CJ” The Straits Times (18 May 2003); “Manila Rolling Out Mobile Courts to Speed Up Cases” The Straits Times (1 July 2004); Selina Lum, “CJ Yong Overhauled Justice System” The Straits Times (1 April 2006); “Listening to the People” The Straits Times (19 May 2006) (excerpt from then Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong’s address to judicial officers); Li Xueying, “Rule of Law Key to S’pore Stability, Growth: MM Lee” The Straits Times (15 October 2007); “Why Singapore Is What It Is” The Straits Times (15 October 2007); Chong Chee Kin & V. C. Vijayan, “Quality of Justice, Not Rankings, Matters: CJ” The Straits Times (5 April 2008); K. C. Vijayan, “No Single Model for Legal System: CJ” The Straits Times (21 January 2009).
254 Reme Ahmad, “At 50, Racial Lines Showing” The Straits Times (16 December 2006); K. C. Vijayan, “A-G Acts to End Man’s Repeated Appeals” The Straits Times (17 November 2007); Kor Kian Beng, “Asean Rights Body Will Foster Justice: Prof” The Straits Times (12 June 2008); Chong & Vijayan, ibid.
255 Tan Ooi Boon, “Senior British Judge Praises Singapore Courts” The Straits Times (1 May 2000).
256 Sue-Ann Chia, “Raising the Bar” The Straits Times (27 October 2006).
257 “Dare to Win, Not Darwin” The Straits Times (17 August 2000).
258 Susan Long, “A ‘Fool’ Who Lights Up Lives” The Straits Times (12 October 2001); K. C. Vijayan, “More to Qualify for Legal Aid” The Straits Times (15 July 2005).
259 Tan Dawn Wei, “Want Free Legal Advice? Get in Line” The Straits Times (9 September 2007); Chong Chee Kin, “Stats Show Courts Not Getting Soft on Crime” The Straits Times (6 January 2008); Radha Basu, “Clients Throng Law Society’s Free Clinic” The Straits Times (9 February 2008); Chong & Vijayan (2008), supra note 251; Lydia Lim, “Legal Fraternity Lauds Jaya’s Stewardship” The Straits Times (13 May 2008); Kimberly Spykerman, “Handle Cases for Free? Why Not Give Cash?” The Straits Times (22 October 2008); “Don’t Condemn Majority of Small Law Firms Which Do Good Work” The Straits Times (15 February 2009); Wong Kim Hoh, “Legal Eagle to the Rescue” The Straits Times (7 April 2009).
260 See discussion in Section III(B)(1) and (2) above.
261 Chan (2007), supra note 8.
262 Abel (2009), supra note 45 at 295-96; Rhode (2005), supra note 1 at 25.
263 Rhode (2005), ibid. at 13.
264 Ibid.
265 Abel (2009), supra note 45 at 296, where Abel also notes that there are differences between the U.S. and England, Canada, Australia, and civil law countries on this point.
266 See Cummings, Scott L. & Sandefur, Rebecca L., “Beyond the Numbers: What We Know – and Should Know – About American Pro Bono” (2013) 7 Harv. L. & Pol’y Rev. 83 Google Scholar at 83 (“Over the past decade, a growing body of research has focused on the significant role that pro bono service has come to play in the overall provision of civil legal aid and public interest law in the United States”).
267 American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Pro Bono Work of America’s Lawyers, Supporting Justice III: A Report on the Pro Bono Work of America’s Lawyers (2013) at 10, online: <http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/probono_public_service/ls_pb_Supporting_Justice_III_final.authcheckdam.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
268 Robert Granfield & Lynn Mather, “Pro Bono, the Public Good, and the Legal Profession: An Introduction,” in Robert Granfield & Lynn Mather, eds., supra note 4 at 9.
269 Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 372 U.S. 335.
270 Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972) 407 U.S. 25.
271 Rhode, Deborah L., Access to Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.
272 For a brief comparison of U.S. and U.K. legal aid on this point, see Lease (1988), supra note 56 at 346.
273 Steven A. Boutcher, “The Institutionalization of Pro Bono in Large Law Firms: Trends and Variations Across the AmLaw 200”, in Robert Granfield & Lynn Mather, eds., supra note 4 at 138.
274 Granfield & Mather, supra note 266 at 8, citing Scott Cummings, “The Politics of Pro Bono” (2004) 52 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 1.
275 American Bar Association, Modes Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 6.1, Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Service, online: at <http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_6_1_voluntary_pro_bono_publico_service.html> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
276 For statistics on the pro bono hours provided by Singapore lawyers, see Law Society of Singapore, Annual Report 2013, Annual Non-Mandatory Pro Bono Hour Survey of Practising Lawyers” at 42, online: <http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/Portals/0/AboutUs/AnnualReport/2013/The%20Law%20Society%20of%20Singapore%20Annual%20Report%202013.pdf> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
277 See supra Section III(B)(2).
278 Boon, Andrew & Whyte, Avis, “‘Charity and Beating Begin at Home’: The Aetiology of the New Culture of Pro Bono” (1999) 2(2) Legal Ethics 169 Google Scholar at 175, n. 41, citing Goriely, T., “Law for the Poor: The Relationship between Advice Agencies and Solicitors in the Development of Poverty Law” (1996) 3 Int’l J. of the Legal Profession 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
279 Andrew Boon, “Cause Lawyers in a Cold Climate”, in Austin Sarat & Scheingold, Stuart, Cause Lawyering and the State in a Global Era (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) at 147 Google Scholar, citing Moorhead, Richard, “Legal Aid in the Eye of a Storm: Rationing, Contracting, and a New Institutionalism” (1998) 25 J. L. & Soc’y 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
280 Boon & Whyte (1999), supra note 276 at 175.
281 Boon (2001), supra note 277 at 147-48.
282 Ibid. at 168.
283 Ibid. at 157-58.
284 Ibid. at 174.
285 Boon & Whyte (1999), supra note 276 at 170.
286 Rhode (2005), supra note 1 at 104, n. 29, citing Boon & Whyte (1999), supra note 276.
287 See e.g. Jon Robins, “Pro Bono: Do We Need to Rethink the Formula Post Legal Aid?” The Guardian (6 November 2012), online: at <http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/nov/06/pro-bono-post-legal-aid> (last accessed 28 July 2014), and Alex Aldridge, “Legal Aid Cuts Will Put Pressure on Students to Do More Pro Bono Work” The Guardian (31 March 2011), online: at <http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/mar/31/legal-aid-cuts-students-pro-bono> (last accessed 28 July 2014).
288 Cheah (2013), supra note 197.
289 After this article was written but prior to publication, it was reported that in “a significant departure from its long-held stance towards legal aid for those accused of non-capital crimes”, the Singapore Government would provide direct legal assistance and support to defendants in criminal cases (Amir Hussain & Amanda Lee, “Govt Will Provide Direct Legal Aid to Defendants In Criminal Cases” Today (7 December 2013), online: <http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/govt-will-provide-direct-legal-aid-defendants-criminal-cases?singlepage=true> (last accessed 28 July 2014); see also S. Ramesh, “Govt to Enhance Criminal Legal Aid Scheme” Channel News Asia (6 December 2013), online: <http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/shanmugam-announces-new/912780.html> (last accessed 28 July 2014), and Thian Yee Sze, Director-General, Ministry of Law, “The Four Principles that Anchor Singapore’s Criminal Justice System” Law Gazette (February 2014), online: <http://www.lawgazette.com.sg/2014-02/964.htm> (last accessed 28 July 2014) (from 2014, “the Government will enhance the funding to the Law Society for the operation of its pro bono criminal legal aid efforts”).
