***************************
Following is the full text of a speech by the Solicitor General, Bob Allcock, at a Conference on China's Accession to World Trade Organisation : Implications for Legal Education and Training today (September 20):
Legal Education in the Global Economy
I am indeed honoured to be addressing such a distinguished audience of lawyers and legal academics from the Mainland and Hong Kong.
Introduction
The question I am asked to address is this : what impact should China's accession to the WTO have on legal education and training in Hong Kong? I intend to argue that we should regard China's accession to the WTO, alongside other developments, as constituting compelling grounds for reform of our system of legal education and training.
Historical background
In order to explain why I take this view, I need to give a brief description of the development of legal education in Hong Kong.
Before 1969, there was no local system for qualifying as a lawyer. Instead, those wishing to practise law would qualify as an English solicitor or barrister, and that qualification would be recognized locally.
LLB and PCLL
Then, in the late 1960's and early 1970's a local route to qualification was created. That was when the LL.B. and Postgraduate Certificate in Laws ("PCLL") were created at the University of Hong Kong. The LL.B. course was modelled on English law degrees, and extends over three years. However, the PCLL departed from the English model, which had separate courses for solicitors and barristers, neither of which were then taught at universities. The PCLL is a university course; it extends over one academic year; and it is a common course for those planning to be solicitors or barristers. After obtaining the PCLL, an intending barrister undertakes a period of pupillage, and an intending solicitor undertakes a training contract.
The local route to practice did not, however, replace the previous avenues to local practice - it was an additional route. English solicitors and barristers continued to be able to gain automatic admission in Hong Kong. In addition, those with an LLB from England and certain other common law countries could gain admission to the PCLL and complete their professional qualification in Hong Kong.
Other developments
In the past thirty years, there have been numerous developments in local legal education. A second law school was established in 1987, at what is now the City University of Hong Kong, enabling the number of LLB students to be almost doubled in the late 1980's.
Since 1964, the School of Professional and Continuing Education ("SPACE") of the University of Hong Kong has been offering preparation courses for the London University LLB. It now has over 5,000 students registered in various law courses, at degree, postgraduate and professional levels - many more than the law faculty at that University and City University's law school combined. Although many of these students have no intention to practise law, if they do obtain an English LLB degree, or the English Common Professional Examination, they are qualified to take the PCLL and therefore have a route to professional qualification.
Another development that has taken place is the creation in 1995 of the Overseas Lawyers Qualification Examination, which enables foreign lawyers to qualify as local solicitors. A similar examination, which will permit foreign lawyers to qualify as local barristers, should begin in the near future.
As for the continuing legal education of qualified lawyers, the Law Society established a mandatory scheme in 1991, and the Bar Association introduced a pilot voluntary scheme in 1998.
Legal education and training have therefore not stood still. However, I think it is fair to say that the developments have not been co-ordinated. The various organisations concerned with legal education have each responded to new demands by adding something to the original scheme. But the primary routes to local qualification remain a local or overseas LLB, followed by the PCLL, and then pupillage or a training contract. Are these routes still appropriate?
Then and now
The creation of the local LLB and PCLL, and the retention of previous avenues to qualification, occurred at a time when the Mainland was isolated from the rest of the world, including Hong Kong, and was going through the Cultural Revolution. Hong Kong was a British colony; was primarily a manufacturing centre; and was served by a few hundred solicitors, barristers and foreign lawyers. The initial annual intake of law students at the University of Hong Kong was 35.
Today, the Mainland benefits from an open door policy, and it stands ready to play a full part in the world economy. Reunification has been smoothly implemented. And Hong Kong is a world centre for finance, transport, telecommunications and other services. There are currently nearly 5,000 practising solicitors, over 700 practicising barristers, and over 600 registered foreign lawyers. The annual intake of local LLB students is 171, and of PCLL students is 259.
Hong Kong has done well in expanding the size of its legal profession. But is the system of legal education, which was designed thirty years ago, appropriate for Hong Kong today? Wide-ranging concerns have been expressed about the quality of some of the lawyers produced in Hong Kong. And let us consider what extra demands China's accession to WTO will add.
China's accession to WTO
Competition
The first extra demand, and perhaps the most crucial one, will be increased competition for legal services. Competition is at the heart of WTO obligations, and of the global economy generally. Hong Kong lawyers will face increased competition in respect of legal services delivered in the Mainland, legal services delivered in Hong Kong in respect of business in the Mainland, and legal services in Hong Kong generally.
That competition will arise because of the opening-up of the Mainland legal services sector; because Hong Kong is becoming a regional centre for foreign lawyers; and because foreign lawyers can qualify as local solicitors and, in due course, as local barristers. Competition in respect of trade and finance related work will also increase because, with the virtual disappearance of the conveyancing market, many solicitors will be seeking to move into these areas.
In this increasingly competitive market, Hong Kong lawyers will need to meet international standards in order to survive. They will be competing with lawyers from other common law jurisdictions which, apart from England, teach law either as a postgraduate programme, or over 4 or 5 years at the undergraduate level. They will be competing with lawyers whose mother-tongue is English. They will be competing with lawyers whose professional training involves skills-based, hands-on, learning. Does our 3-year LL.B., and our subject-based PCLL, adequately prepare our students - for most of whom English is a second language - for such competition? Does it adequately prepare them in the use of Chinese legal language?
Specialisation
The second challenge that WTO poses for our lawyers is that of specialisation. WTO law is extremely specialised and complex. How many lawyers are experts in anti-dumping and competition laws, in information technology and intellectual property? How many have mastered the Mainland's regulations in WTO-related areas? Hong Kong is extremely well-placed to develop as a centre for the resolution of disputes occurring under international trade agreements made with Mainland organisations. But, for this to happen, we must have sufficient lawyers with the necessary expertise.
Are we enabling our lawyers to develop these different types of expertise? We cannot expect a law degree and vocational training to cover all these areas. But they should provide a good foundation for such expertise, and there should be some institutional setting in which qualified lawyers can develop their knowledge.
Managing change
The third challenge created by WTO is that of managing change. The global economy is bringing about change at a speed never before witnessed. Change is occurring in all aspects of the business and professional world - changes in technology brought about by the microchip; changes in the way professionals operate, such as through multi-disciplinary partnerships; and changes in our laws and systems of dispute resolution. After China joins the WTO we can expect very rapid changes in its laws in order to meet that organisations' requirements.
What has this got to do with legal education? I would suggest that managing change has three major implications for legal education.
First, our legal education must produce lawyers who are capable of self-renewal. The days when the subjects learnt at law school could support a lawyer's whole career have long gone. Learning black letter law cannot be avoided, but the intellectual skills and attitudes that enable a lawyer to go on learning and adapting to new challenges should receive equal treatment.
Secondly, support should be provided for qualified lawyers who wish to specialize in new areas, or to change the manner in which they deliver their professional services.
Thirdly, our system of legal education must itself be capable of responding to changes in the legal environment. Subjects that were mandatory in the 1970's may not be relevant now. Is there a system in place to facilitate such change and to ensure that the universities are aware of changing needs?
The Review of Legal Education and Training
To recap, I regard increased competition, a need for specialisation, and a need to manage change as three challenges posed by WTO. Is our system of legal education and training equipped to meet those challenges? And if not, what should be done?
For one view on this, let me refer to the Report on Legal Education and Training recently produced by two Australian consultants - Professor Paul Redmond and Mr Christopher Roper.
Competition
The consultants do not consider our system is the best that can be designed to produce lawyers of international standard, who can compete with the best that the world can offer. They consider that English language standards are not sufficiently developed; that a 3-year undergraduate degree is too short; that students' horizons should be broadened by exposure to more non-law subjects; and that the PCLL does not adequately teach professional skills.
Moreover, there are concerns that the avenue by which those with overseas law degrees, or the Common Professional Examination, can take the PCLL and eventually qualify, may not provide adequate preparation for local practice. Those following that route may not have received education in key areas of Hong Kong law, including our new constitutional order. The consultants recommend that a 6-month conversion course be established to make up deficits relative to the training provided in Hong Kong universities before progressing to the vocational training stage.
Specialisation
Turning to specialisation, many local lawyers have expressed their wish to develop new areas of expertise but find insufficient support. The programmes of continuing professional education are not intended to, and do not, cater for in-depth and prolonged study.
One suggestion put forward by the Law Society is that an Academy of Law be established to provide a "one-stop shop for ... training for all lawyers post LL.B". That training could include specialist training in specified areas of practice and specialist accreditation. The two consultants consider the proposal to be worthy of serious consideration.
Managing change
What about the need to manage change? The recommendations I have already mentioned would, if implemented, address the need for the necessary intellectual skills to be developed, and for a support system to be put in place.
That leaves the capacity for change of the legal education and training system itself. My earlier description of the various avenues to qualification indicates a fairly complex system. The prerequisites for admission to practice are found in various places. For example, the universities specify the core law degree subjects; the requirements for admission as a barrister or solicitor are specified in the Legal Practitioners Ordinance; and the requirements for entry into pupillage and training contracts are specified by the Bar Association and Law Society respectively. In addition, a number of different bodies, including the Advisory Committee on Legal Education and the Joint Examinations Board, monitor different aspects of legal education.
Having considered this system, the consultants concluded that it "does not have an internal capacity to review and renew itself". According to the consultants, "the system is enmeshed and almost incapable of reform". This is because, when any stakeholder wants to change any aspect of the system in a way that may affect other stakeholders, there is often an impasse. An example given is that of the PCLL course, which has existed since 1972 but which has never been the subject of an overall review by all parties with an interest in it.
At a time of rapid change, which will be accelerated by China's accession to the WTO, we surely cannot afford to have a system of legal education which is so resistant to change. On the contrary, we should develop ways in which legal education can adjust rapidly to changes in legal environment. One possible solution, recommended by the consultants, is to create a Legal Qualifying Council, consisting of representatives from the main stakeholders, and having the power to prescribe and keep under review the academic and vocational requirements for admission to practice.
Conclusion
In conclusion, where we should we go from here? The first stage of the Review of the Legal Education and Training has been completed with the publication of the consultants' report. A second stage is planned, in which a high-powered Review Panel will consider the report, and other relevant materials, and make final recommendations for the way forward.
It is therefore too early to say what reforms are likely to be implemented. But, as the review progresses, I hope that all stakeholders will put aside any short-term and narrow self interests. We should all see this as a golden opportunity to revise our system in a way that will produce lawyers of the highest international standard. That is what our future law students deserve; that is what our community deserves; and that is what will assist Hong Kong and the Mainland to benefit fully from WTO membership.
End/Thursday, September 20, 2001
NNNN
