Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
JLC: it's not a question of going down the path - you will get invited to apply for it. Sort of like being fielded as a PAP MP candidate - you are identified and selected, not the other way round. If you do get it, you will be perceived as the very cream of your cohort, so it is definitely worth it.
Being a judge: following from the fact that a JLC is perceived as being the cream of the cohort, obviously being a JLC will put you in a better position to be a judge than a non-JLC. But judgeship, and I assume you mean Supreme Court judiciary, is so remote that you might as well ask if you can be a Minister or Perm Sec.
PhD: law PhDs are usually called JSDs by the way. Just go to the NUS or SMU website and look at the faculty profiles to see how many get JSDs and you'll have your answer. |
JLC: It's not that you are selected per se, it's that only first-class/top 10-15% (in terms of grades) get to attend the interview. However, evidently the academic rigor of each school is different. You'll see "first-class" students from sub-par overseas schools getting asked to attend the interview alongside the top students from oxbridge/locals.
If you're really serious about JLC, be a law journal writer, a top student in your cohort, or win a prestigious moot.
Judge: This is a crapshoot, but generally speaking it's actually easier for high achievers in private practice to be invited to become a judge than working your way up the ladder (from say AGC to District Court Judge/AR to supreme Court Judge).
PHD: A JSD from a good university will open doors for you in the academic field, but it's so long/waste of time that most law schools do not require that their professors take the JSD (unlike in other fields where a PHD is a basic requirement). Just get a good LLM from at least a tier 2 school (obviously tier 1 would be best).