No comments. Any further.

This in short encapsulates the latest three paragraph statement by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) in response to the Facebook post by Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) on Jan. 7.

LHY, brother of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, published a Facebook post last night denying that his wife, Lee Suet Fern, was ever the late Lee Kuan Yew’s lawyer.

LHY said that no one had “complained from the outset on the process and circumstances of our father’s signing his final will” and then questioned: "Why is AGC rushing this case in 2019 when the facts were known by all parties for years?"

On Jan. 7, AGC has referred the circumstances behind the drafting of Lee Kuan Yew's seventh will as a case of possible professional misconduct involving Lee Suet Fern to the Law Society.

AGC added that Lee appears to have prepared the last will and arranged for Lee Kuan Yew to execute it, despite the fact that LHY was one of the beneficiaries under the last will.

Disciplinary process by Law Society

According to the disciplinary tribunal process available on the law society website, the inquiry panel consists of Singapore lawyers, foreign lawyers and lay persons from other professions appointed by the Chief Justice for a term (renewable) of two years.

There are three stages in terms of how the complaint of misconduct is processed.

The First Stage - The Review Process

A complaint against a lawyer will be referred to the Council which will make the decision to refer the complaint to the Chairman of the Inquiry Panel (IP).

The Chairman of the IP will then refer the matter to an independent panel of persons appointed by the Chief Justice to review a complaint.

The first stage of the review process of a complaint is to refer the same to a two-man Review Committee (RC) consisting of a lawyer and a legal officer. The RC will decide if the complaint is of any substance that must be referred to an inquiry.

If the complaint is found to merit an inquiry, the Chairman of the IP will refer the complaint to the second stage where an Inquiry Committee would be appointed to conduct an inquiry into your complaint.

The Second Stage - The Inquiry Process

The members of the Inquiry Committee (IC) are appointed from the independent panel of persons appointed by the Chief Justice to carry out the inquiry function.

It will, however, consist of two lawyers, a judicial or government legal officer and a lay person (non-lawyer). The complainant can be called upon by the IC to provide information to support his or her complaint.

An IC has the power to call for the production and inspection of documents connected with the inquiry or persons to give evidence.

Time limits for Inquiry into a complaint

An IC has a minimum period of two months and a maximum period of six months from their date of appointment to investigate a complaint if the lawyer is called to respond to the complaint.

If the IC is of the view that the lawyer need not be called upon to answer the complaint, the IC will submit its report within two months of its appointment to the Law Society.

Recommendations an Inquiry Committee can make after an inquiry

If an IC finds a case of misconduct has been made out against a lawyer, the IC may recommend that the Society prosecute the complaint before a higher tribunal called a Disciplinary Tribunal or recommend a financial penalty (up to a maximum of S$10,000) be imposed on the lawyer that is paid to the Society.

No further comments from AGC, will Lee Hsien Yang or Lee Wei Ling carry on commenting?

A ceasefire from AGC, after two days of press releases, does not mean that Lee Hsien Yang or Lee Wei Ling will agree to stop commenting online.

However, the AGC reminded all parties to be mindful not to prejudice the proper hearing of the matter.

The full statement by AGC below:

The matter has been referred to the Law Society in accordance with the law, and consistent with how the Attorney-General’s Chambers (“AGC”) has handled other cases of alleged professional misconduct by lawyers.

2 There will be a full hearing before the Disciplinary Tribunal appointed by the Chief Justice. Ms Lee Suet Fern can put forward her case before the Tribunal, in accordance with the Legal Profession Act.

3 AGC therefore does not propose to comment any further on the merits of the matter. We would also like to remind all parties to be mindful not to prejudice the proper hearing of the matter.

Top image adapted from smuconlaw via Wikimedia Commons and Facebook