PUTRAJAYA, March 9 — The Federal Court here today ruled that senior lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah did not breach the publicity rules under the Legal Profession Act when he was interviewed by an English daily in 2009.
A five-man bench chaired by Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Md Raus Shariff made the ruling after it (the court) upheld a Court of Appeal decision that set aside a RM5,000 fine which was imposed on Muhammad Shafee by the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board in 2012, over publication of two articles by The Star.
“We agree with the Court of Appeal that he (Muhammad Shafee) did not breach the 2001 Rules (Legal Profession (Publicity) Rules 2001),” said Md Raus.
The panel unanimously dismissed the Bar Council’s appeal against that Court of Appeal’s decision.
Md Raus said looking at the statement in question and the context under which it was made, there was no publicity (on the part of Muhammad Shafee) within the meaning of the publicity rules.
He ordered the Bar Council to pay RM50,000 in legal costs to Muhammad Shafee.
The other judges presiding on the panel were Federal Court judges Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar, Tan Sri Hasan Lah, Datuk Azahar Mohamed and Court of Appeal judge Datuk Aziah Ali.
Muhammad Shafee was fined RM5,000 by the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board on Oct 5, 2012 for violating the Legal Profession (Publicity) Rules 2001 following publication of the articles entitled ‘Counsel rests his case’ and ‘Keeping within the letter of the law’ which were published on Sept 27, 2009.
In 2010, then Bar Council chairman Ragunath Kesavan had reported the matter to the advocates and solicitors disciplinary board over publication of the articles which were said to be “laudatory”.
Muhammad Shafee lost his bid at the High Court to set aside the disciplinary board’s decision but succeeded in his appeal at the Court of Appeal.
Lawyer for the Bar Council, Arthur Wang Ming Way told reporters that the Federal Court’s decision today was one of a rare decision as the disciplinary board’s decision was being challenged and Muhammad Shafee succeeded to get the board’s decision set aside.
However, Muhammad Shafee said for him it was a landmark decision because the court had ruled for the first time on the publicity rules and what amounted to publicity and advertising.
Earlier in the appeal proceeding today, Muhammad Shafee asked for legal costs of RM300,000, saying that the Bar Council had to be taught a lesson that “selective prosecution” was unfair.
In his submission, Muhammad Shafee who represented himself in the appeal, questioned why the Bar Council was targeting him instead of other lawyers who were also in the limelight in magazines and other publications.
He said he did not have the intention to publicise himself when he agreed to give the interview to the journalist.
Wang said the Bar Council was not “picking on him” but said Muhammad Shafee had breached the publicity rules because the article which was the result of the interview given by him contained “laudatory” information. — Bernama
