|
Bernama
by Alan Ting
KUALA LUMPUR, May 17 (Bernama) - Is another body necessary to represent lawyers
in the country? The answers are yes and no.
Yes, as pointed out by Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee, that there is no
issue in setting up another body to represent lawyers with a particular
interest.
Examples are the Malaysian Muslim Lawyers Association and Catholic Lawyers
Society.
But no, if another body is established to set standards, regulate and issue
practising certificates.
Lim said only the Bar Council was empowered under the Legal Profession Act (LPA)
1976 to act.
He was reported to have said that previously, there was an attempt to amend the
Legal Profession Act (LPA) to allow for the establishment of an Academy of Law,
but this was strongly opposed by the Bar Council in 1996 and 2002.
Given the above scenario, it is not surprising that some lawyers have mixed
opinions on the matter as they point out that there should be only one body to
regulate the role of lawyers.
Gerakan deputy president Datuk Chang Ko Youn, who is also the party's Legal
Bureau chairman, also disagrees that another regulatory body should be formed to
represent lawyers as the existing Bar Council is the current certified legal
body.
"We may disagree with the conduct of the Bar Council, but we are not in favour
of having another bar council. Those who don't agree with the Bar Council can
come out openly to criticise it or even challenge the existing office- bearers
in the Bar Council's election, but not by breaking up the Bar Council," he said.
Chang feels that efforts to start another regulatory body would not have arisen
if the Bar Council has taken a non-partisan line, but judging from the way the
current Bar has been handling things, it clearly shows that it is taking sides.
Senior lawyer Roger Tan also said that should another body be set up with the
same regulatory function, it would create a conflict.
"In other countries, they have legal or law academies but they don't exercise
the function of regulators. For example, in Singapore, there is an Academy of
Law, but it mainly organises social functions, which allow law students and
academicians to join. But, the Law Society of Singapore is still the regulatory
body for lawyers (in Singapore)," he said.
"However, to me, the issue of having another body arose because of the one-
sided motions (during the recent Bar Council's extraordinary general meeting).
If you pass one-sided motions, this is what you get," he added.
"I think most lawyers are from the silent majority. Can't blame them not to turn
up at the EGM. Why don't they do a referendum? The Bar Council can send out
ballot papers on the motions. If the lawyers can't come, they can submit the
ballot papers," said a Kuala Lumpur-based lawyer who did not wish to be
identified.
However, some lawyers when contacted at random said any change should come from
within the Bar Council itself.
Those who were not happy should table a vote of no-confidence against the
existing Bar Council's office-bearers, they said.
No need to set up another regulatory body, they said, adding that they were also
sceptical of the proposal to set up an Academy of Law, citing that previous
attempts in 1996 and 2002 were withdrawn after objections from the Bar Council.
The Bar Council had then contended that the functions outlined in the bill were
too wide and that it could be freely interpreted that those functions could
usurp the power and role of the existing Malaysian Bar.
PPP president Datuk M. Kayveas, who was the deputy minister in the Prime
Minister's Department involved in the Academy of Law bill then, said in light of
current events, there might be a need to re-look at it.
He told Bernama that the bill was withdrawn following a discussion with the Bar
Council when the latter agreed to focus more on welfare and on improving the
professionalism of the Bar.
Currently, the Bar Council is opposed to the third attempt to set up a law
academy as it claims the government feels threatened by an independent Bar.
But there are also lawyers who believe that the issue will not arise if the
current Bar Council had taken a more objective, neutral and balanced stance at
its recent EGM.
If one were to look across the Causeway, some lawyers revealed that the creation
of the Singapore Law Academy came about after the relationship between the
Singapore Law Society and the government turned sour following the society's
opposition to a legislation to restrict the circulation of foreign publications
critical of Singapore's politics.
The bill on the new Academy of Law was passed by the Singapore parliament on Aug
11, 1988 and came into force on Nov 1 the same year.
Singapore's prime minister then, Lee Kuan Yew made these remarks when debating
on the bill in the Singapore parliament:"It is my job as prime minister in
charge of the government to put a stop to politicking in professional bodies.
"If you want to politicise, you form your own party...you think you can be
smarter than the government and outsmart it, well, if you win, you form the
government. If I win, we have a new Law Society. It is as simple as that."
Comments () |
|
|
|
|
|
