ALT ALT

Singapore lawyer Lim Tean handed over to authorities after arrest in Johor Bahru

Singapore lawyer Lim Tean handed over to authorities after arrest in Johor Bahru

SINGAPORE, Aug 12 — Lawyer and opposition politician Lim Tean has been handed over to Singapore authorities following his arrest in Johor Bahru, The Straits Times reported.

The Singapore Police Force said its Commercial Affairs Department arrested Lim upon his return from Malaysia. The 61-year-old was arrested by the Royal Malaysian Police in Johor Bahru on Aug 6.

Lim had failed to surrender at the Singapore State Courts on Aug 3 to begin serving his three-month-and-one-week jail sentence for practising law without a valid practising certificate. An arrest warrant was issued against him on the same day.

Police said investigations into the circumstances surrounding his departure from Singapore were ongoing.

Lim, founder of opposition party Peoples Voice and secretary-general of the People’s Alliance for Reform, was convicted of three charges under the Legal Profession Act in July 2024.

According to the report, he was initially sentenced to six weeks’ jail and a S$1,000 fine in February 2025, after attending court hearings and submitting documents on 32 occasions between April and June 2021 without a valid practising certificate.

The Straits Times reported that Lim later appealed against his conviction and sentence, while prosecutors sought a stiffer sentence. In February 2026, the High Court allowed the prosecution’s appeal and increased his sentence to three months and one week.

On Aug 8, two Singaporeans who allegedly helped Lim leave Singapore were charged with engaging in a conspiracy to commit an act with a tendency to defeat the course of justice. Mohammad Adam Abd Karim, 44, and Sulaiman Muhammad Firdaus, 37, allegedly made arrangements for Lim to leave Singapore on Aug 4.

In April 2026, Lim was also fined S$30,000 in a disciplinary case over his handling of a S$30,000 cheque meant for his client.

The Law Society of Singapore had called for him to be struck off the rolls, while the Court of Three Judges cited, among other factors, his cavalier attitude towards lawyers’ obligations in handling clients’ money and his status as a senior practitioner with more than 25 years of experience.