A group of lawyers is demanding an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to voice concerns about the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) electing Dinesh Singh Dhillon as its incoming president for 2026. The request surfaces after questions from parts of the legal community about whether the Bar remains independent when a statutory appointee leads the council.
A notice dated December 9, seen by CNA, proposes holding the EGM on December 22 to discuss whether the council should elect a president who was chosen by LawSoc’s members rather than by internal council vote. The motion’s author, senior lawyer Peter Cuthbert Low, who also proposed it, co-signed with former LawSoc president Chandra Mohan K Nair, who is listed as the motion’s seconder.
The core issue centers on Dhillon’s election as president of the 2026 LawSoc council after an internal council vote. Unlike prior presidents, Dhillon was a statutory member of the 2025 council appointed by the Law Minister, meaning he was not elected by LawSoc’s roughly 6,400 members.
Under the Legal Profession Act, LawSoc’s council seats are filled by a mix of elected and statutory members. The 2026 council comprises 21 lawyers, including the president, two vice-presidents, and the treasurer. Of these, 15 are elected by LawSoc members, while the remaining members are statutory and may include the immediate past president, up to three ministerial appointees from the Law Ministry, and up to three members appointed by the council itself. From this body, the president and other office-bearers must be chosen.
LawSoc told CNA that Dhillon was appointed as a statutory member of the 2025 council by the Law Minister, with a two-year term starting September 1, 2025. People familiar with the matter told CNA that Dhillon ran against incumbent vice president Samuel Chacko for the president’s post in the recent office-bearer elections and won by a narrow margin.
LawSoc publicly confirmed Dhillon’s election as 2026 president at a council meeting but did not provide further details due to confidentiality. Dhillon, a veteran lawyer who was called to the Bar in 1995, leads Allen & Gledhill’s international arbitration practice and chairs Pro Bono SG, a charity offering free legal aid.
Earlier, CNA reported that a requisition notice circulating after Dhillon’s appointment called for an EGM to examine the Bar’s independence and whether the president must be an elected council member. LawSoc initially said a written requisition notice for an EGM had been deposited with a vice-president the previous day and that the council was reviewing it under Section 68 of the Legal Profession Act.
The latest move by Low asserts that LawSoc’s council resolved not to convene an EGM, prompting the requisitioning members to push forward with their own notice. Under the Act, any 25 members may requisition a general meeting by submitting a signed written notice to the president or a vice-president. The council must convene within 14 days, and the meeting must occur within 30 days of receiving the notice. If the council fails to act, the requisitioning members may organize the meeting themselves within two months.
In the meantime, LawSoc has organized a tea session for December 10 to address members’ questions about the transition of the 2026 council and its plans, rather than holding an EGM.
Low, Chandran Mohan, Dhillon, and Chacko declined comment when approached. Low is the managing director at Peter Low Chambers; Chandra Mohan, a former LawSoc president (1995–1997) and a Tan Rajah & Cheah partner, also served as a Nominated Member of Parliament from 2002 to 2004.
Dhillon is noted as the first president-elect to be a ministerially appointed statutory member. LawSoc clarified that ministerial appointees have previously held office-bearer roles, including vice presidents or treasurers. The Act does not bar a ministerially appointed statutory member from being elected president or other office-bearer, LawSoc stated. The absence of a specific qualification for the presidency is noted, beyond the general requirement that council members must not be disqualified from holding office.
MinLaw, asked for comment on November 26, acknowledged ongoing discussions but stressed that statutory members are council members, not MinLaw representatives, and that these members are expected to act in the Law Society and legal profession’s best interests. The ministry added that the election of office bearers remains the Law Society’s prerogative.
