Culture and Tourism Minister Nazri Aziz said in an interview with Malay Mail Online today that he is opposed to the government’s planned amendments to the Legal Profession Act (LPA) 1976, saying these would be seen as interference in the independent professional body representing lawyers in peninsular Malaysia.
Nazri’s statement is most welcome news.
The government must not interfere in the Bar Council’s self-regulation and internal management and it should drop the planned amendments altogether. The government should just forge ahead as a partner of democracy of the Bar Council.
In the last session of Parliament, government backbenchers questioned the role and functions of the Bar Council and accused it of acting more like an opposition party. In particular, the filing of a judicial review application by the Malaysian Bar was perceived as interference in the government’s role.
The Bar’s judicial review application sought to:
1. Set aside attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali’s exoneration of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak on Jan 26 and his directive for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to close investigations; and
2. To disqualify Apandi from making any further decision regarding the MACC's investigation into the RM2.6 billion donation as he is reported to have advised Najib on the probe.
In the ensuing debate, I made it plain to the MPs and the government that the Bar Council was just ensuring the custodian role of the law for the nation, without fear or favour.
In the initial years up to 1974, the government lacked lawyers to scrutinise parliamentary bills and thus the Bar Council was entrusted to check and vet all bills before the government presented them to Parliament.
The proposal of the government was to curtail the powers of the Bar Council, in particular by appointing two representatives to sit in the council. Further, the quorum is to be increased and even the electoral process of the Bar Council was proposed to be amended.
'A totally foolish idea of the government'
This attempt by the government was perceived as “drastic” changes aimed to cut the Bar Council to its size. A totally foolish idea of the government. The Bar Council was also told to be concerned only on issues affecting its members, namely “bread and butter issues”
Unfortunately the attorney-general and the government failed to read and understand the Legal Profession Act, as it is stipulated in Section 42, that the Bar should, among other matters, act without fear or favour.
Instead of trying to control it, the government should empower the Bar further. In particular, it should strengthen the Legal Aid role of the Bar by dispensing the current charges (court fees for filing, etc) levied on matters it takes to court to represent the poor.
This special “concession” is at present granted to the government’s Legal Aid Bureau. Both legal aid sectors are set up to act for the poor and marginalised so that no one is denied legal representation. Why then does the Bar Council’s Legal Aid has to be “taxed”?
The Bar could be outspoken, but it acts as a check-and-balance on the government, judiciary and the Parliament. With the present set up, it has brought about confidence to investors and the like.
No one should act like God, for all institutions and humans have limits. I am happy Nazri, being a former minister in charge of law, understands and accepts the crucial role played by the Bar in an evolving and dynamising democracy in Malaysia.
I urge other ministers to openly support the statement by Nazri as it is forthright and principled. Can we count on, and hope, that some more cabinet ministers will open their mouth?
M KULASEGARAN is the MP for Ipoh Barat and DAP national vice-chairperson.
