KUALA LUMPUR, March 1 — Accusing the current Bar Council of being part of “anti-establishment politics” and deviating from its original purpose, a legal volunteer group is now proposing an alternative body to run parallel to the council.
In an interview with Umno-owned daily Utusan Malaysia, the group accused the Bar Council of supporting federal opposition parties, and said its alleged lack of impartiality has caused dissatisfaction among the majority of the members of the Malaysian Bar.
“Among the alternatives that we are trying to bring to concerned parties is the formation of an alternative bar council. We have finished a proposal paper and are now only waiting to deliver it,” said Datuk Khairul Anwar Rahmat, the chairman of Malaysian Volunteer Lawyers Association (SukaGuam).
“We will also recommend for a Queen’s Counsel to be appointed to study and draft a Second Bar Act. This is to destroy the monopoly of the Bar Council and give a choice to lawyers.”
Khairul Anwar accused the council of intimidating lawyers by insisting on a certification programme separate from that of the Malayan High Court, and raiding law firms which offered discounts.
In the same interview with Utusan’s Sunday edition Mingguan Malaysia, former chief executive officer of the Bar Council Secretariat Shaharudin Ali also outlined several of his grouses with the council.
According to Shaharudin, among the Bar Council’s problems are its election system, its delegation of tasks to state committees, its failure to report annually to the Parliament and its refusal to use the Malay language in its internal notices and documents.
“The Bar Council, as a public body defined under the Article 161 of the Federal Constitution, is obliged to use the Malay language. I have not seen the Bar Council issuing a statement saying that the body will use the Malay language because it is a public body.
“Even at its annual general meeting, the Bar Council uses English,” added Shaharudin.
Despite that, Shaharudin said the second bar must not be seen as being sponsored by Putrajaya or any other parties.
He also blamed the Advocates Association of Sarawak and Sabah Law Association for opposing the proposal for an alternative bar, even when the current Bar Council purportedly does not affect affairs in the two states.
Last month, a group of 100 lawyers dubbing themselves “G100” demanded that Bar Council president Christopher Leong retract a statement critical of the prosecution of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy or resign if he is unwilling to do so.
They claimed Leong had impugned the Malaysian judiciary with a statement that highlighted “glaring anomalies” in the prosecution of the federal opposition leader, which he said fuelled perception that Anwar’s case was political persecution rather than a criminal prosecution.
Leong’s term as Malaysian Bar president, however, ends this month as he has served his maximum two years in office.
