| |
SINGAPORE: After being accused on the Internet of pushing the gay agenda, Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Siew Kum Hong now finds himself defending his professional conduct following his active role in the recent Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) saga.
TODAY has learnt of an email seeking clarification on whether Mr Siew – a non-practising lawyer – had contravened the Legal Profession Act by rendering pro-bono legal advisory work.
It was sent to four bodies: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), the Law Society, the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association (SCCA) and the Singapore Academy of Law.
Neither the AGC nor the Law Society, which govern the conduct of lawyers, was able to respond by press time. SCCA president Angeline Lee said her association was "looking into this matter".
Corporate counsels are not considered to be practising lawyers, who need to renew their practising certificates every year. Section 33 of the Legal Profession Act prohibits any person without such a certificate from providing the services of an advocate or solicitor.
Offenders could be fined up to S$25,000, or jailed for a maximum of six months.
When contacted, the sender of the email, Mr Tongel Yeo, 51, stressed that it was "not about Siew Kum Hong", but the wider question on the extent that corporate counsels could "represent to people that we are legal advisers".
Mr Yeo, himself a corporate counsel who sits on the board of the charity group Methodist Welfare Services, said he had been a passive onlooker in the AWARE saga. He did not attend the extraordinary meeting on May 2, but read the subsequent newspaper reports.
He said: "That's when I read that he was reported to have claimed he was a legal adviser and going to his website, it appears that's what he was doing – advising them."
In response, Mr Siew, who is seeking a second NMP term, was confident he had not breached any regulations.
Reiterating that he was "at all time, cognisant of the fact that I do not hold a practising certificate", Mr Siew said: "It was the members of the Old Guard of AWARE who described me as their legal adviser. I did not hold myself up as such."
He did advise them "on a variety of matters, including my own views on the Constitution of AWARE".
But he stressed: "I believe that all in-house counsels – and in fact, all trained lawyers – do from time to time, state their views of what the law in a specific situation would be, in the context and capacity other than being an advocate or solicitor."
He added: "I hope this is not part of what seems to be an ongoing, orchestrated campaign to target me."
While the legal bodies have not yet sought Mr Siew's response, he said he was considering writing to them to express his position.
- TODAY/so
|
