Law Society President raises concerns over leak of confidential probe details

SINGAPORE: Lisa Sam Hui Min, president of the Law Society of Singapore, publicly disputed how details of an internal investigation were disclosed to the media before being formally shared with her.

In a LinkedIn post shared in the early hours of 17 December 2025, Lisa said she was surprised and deeply troubled that information from what was meant to be an independent and confidential process had reached the press ahead of her being provided written allegations.

The investigation, commissioned by the Law Society’s audit committee and delegated to TSMP Law Corporation, concerns anonymous complaints and assertions relating to alleged workplace misconduct within the organisation.

Lisa noted that some of the matters referred to in the anonymous complaints predated her tenure as president.

Confusion over claimed progress report

Lisa also expressed confusion over public statements made by TSMP, particularly remarks suggesting that a progress report had already been submitted to the audit committee.

She said she had twice requested that TSMP provide the specific allegations in writing, so she could give a meaningful and accurate response. Those details, she said, were not provided.

“As President of the Law Society, I was asked to provide information to TSMP,” she wrote, adding that without clarity on the allegations, it was difficult to understand how any substantive interim report could exist.

Lisa said she first learned of what was purportedly being investigated through a Straits Times article published on 16 December 2025 titled Independent probe underway at Law Society following allegations of workplace bullying.

Willingness to cooperate, but concern over confidentiality

Despite her objections, Lisa said she remained willing to cooperate fully with the investigation and would provide information to assist once the queries were formally set out in writing.

She stressed that the review must still be ongoing and incomplete, given that TSMP had yet to share the written allegations with her, calling into question the nature of any reported progress update.

Lisa further said she was troubled that TSMP’s joint managing partner had made statements to the press about a confidential matter, which she suggested could potentially breach duties owed to the audit committee and the Law Society.

She stated that she reserved all her rights and intended to seek independent legal advice regarding the disclosures.

Straits Times report outlines allegations and scope of probe

The Law Society’s internal investigation was first reported by Singapore state media outlet The Straits Times, which said the organisation was undergoing an independent probe following a viral Reddit post published in September 2025.

The post, shared on the subreddit r/SingaporeRaw, alleged widespread workplace bullying, mismanagement, and a toxic leadership culture within the Law Society.

According to the report, the anonymous author described an organisation marked by fear, favouritism, and dysfunction, with staff subjected to degrading treatment and constant pressure to be available outside working hours.

The post claimed employees were punished for minor infractions or delays and raised concerns about how a reported sexual harassment incident was handled.

Claims of mishandled harassment complaint and online reviews

The Reddit post alleged that no disciplinary action was taken following a sexual harassment complaint and that the individual involved was allowed to leave quietly.

It also linked to Glassdoor Singapore reviews that echoed similar grievances, contributing to the Law Society’s rating of 1.4 stars as of December 2025.

Only 5 per cent of reviewers recommended the organisation as a workplace, according to the platform, with comments describing a hostile environment resistant to feedback or reform.

Appointment of TSMP and staff interviews

In response to the allegations, the Law Society’s audit committee appointed TSMP Law Corporation to conduct an independent investigation.

Senior Counsel Thio Shen Yi, who is overseeing the process, told The Straits Times that a progress report had been submitted to the audit committee, although no further details were disclosed publicly.

The report said multiple current and former staff members were interviewed between October and December 2025.

One individual reportedly submitted a statutory declaration affirming the accuracy of information shared with the investigative team.

High staff turnover and operational disruption

The investigation comes amid significant staff turnover within the Law Society.

In 2025 alone, more than one-third of the organisation’s over 70 full-time employees resigned, according to The Straits Times.

Those who left included a chief executive officer who served for fewer than four months and a longstanding senior executive whose departure was said to have triggered further resignations.

At one point, the human resources department was reportedly left entirely unstaffed, with HR functions subsequently outsourced.

Allegations of burnout, overreach and governance failures

Former and current employees alleged a workplace culture characterised by burnout, micromanagement and fear, with staff contacted around the clock and assigned tasks beyond their job scope.

According to The Straits Times, some employees said they were publicly humiliated, anxious about sudden dismissal, and demoralised by performance reviews overridden by senior leaders detached from day-to-day operations.

The probe is also examining governance and financial oversight concerns, including overseas expenses approved by a small executive committee without full council scrutiny.

Staff also questioned transparency and accountability in the handling of misconduct and harassment complaints, claiming whistleblowers were marginalised and trust in leadership had eroded.

Governance dispute and extraordinary general meeting

Running parallel to the cultural investigation is an escalating governance dispute within the Law Society.

An extraordinary general meeting has been scheduled for 22 December 2025 following concerns over leadership legitimacy and accountability.

The dispute arose from the appointment of a president who joined the council as a ministerial appointee rather than through election, prompting questions about democratic representation.

After the council declined to convene an EGM, members Peter Cuthbert Low and Chandra Mohan Nair moved to proceed independently.

What began as a single proposal expanded into three motions, including restricting top leadership roles to elected council members and a vote of no confidence in parts of the incoming council.