Press Statement By KL Bar

Taken from KL bar blog

Good one. An demand that this Ketua Bahagian chap to retract and apologise.

KENYATAAN AKHBAR

Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur menyelar kenyataan yang dikeluarkan oleh Ketua UMNO Bahagian Cheras, Datuk Wira Syed Ali Alhabshee mencabar Majlis Peguam untuk didaftarkan sebagai pertubuhan politik.

Majlis Peguam Malaysia adalah sebuah badan professional yang tidak cenderung pada mana-mana parti politik. Ia tidak pernah dan tidak akan terpengaruh dengan aliran politik mana-mana parti politik dan hanya berhasrat untuk menegakkan keadilan melalui keluhuran perlembagaan dan kedaulatan undang-undang.

Berkenaan dengan insiden penangkapan lima (5) orang peguam daripada Pusat Bantuan Guaman tersebut, Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur ingin menegaskan bahawa ia adalah satu kewajipan peguam untuk memberi nasihat kepada anak guam sekiranya anak guam memohon untuk perkhidmatan peguam di mana hak-hak untuk berjumpa dengan peguam juga adalah dinyatakan jelas di Kod Prosidur Jenayah.

Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur mengecam penahanan tersebut dan melihatnya sebagai intimidasi dari pihak polis untuk menghalang lima orang tersebut dari menjalankan tanggungjawab mereka.

Atas dasar itu, Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur memberi sokongan penuh kepada resolusi-resolusi yang diputuskan pada Mesyuarat Luar Biasa Majlis Peguam pada 15 Mei 2009, yang antara lain mendesak supaya Menteri Dalam Negeri dan Ketua Polis Negara meletakkan jawatan mereka di atas apa yang berlaku.

Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur juga mengecam kenyataan Datuk Wira Syed Ali Alhabshee bahawa Majlis Peguam adalah sebuah badan anti kerajaan dan bersifat perkauman berdasarkan komposisi etniknya. Majlis Peguam adalah terdiri daripada warganegara Malaysia yang berbilang bangsa dan agama di mana komposisinya adalah seperti berikut:

Kaum Melayu : 39%

Kaum Cina : 37%

Kaum India : 23%

Lain-lain : 1%

Oleh itu, kenyataan tersebut adalah tidak tepat, dan berbaur perkauman.

Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur juga menegaskan bahawa keluhuran dan kedaulatan undang-undang negara ini mestilah dihormati oleh semua pihak dan mengingatkan bahawa tidak ada mana-mana pihak yang kebal dari tindakan undang-undang termasuk pihak Polis sekiranya melampaui batasan undang-undang.

Oleh itu, Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur mendesak supaya Datuk Wira Syed Ali Alhabshee menarik balik kenyataannya serta merta.

Bertarikh 20hb Mei 2009

Anand Ponnudurai

Pengerusi

Jawatankuasa Peguam Kuala Lumpur

Press Release from the President of the Malaysian Bar

PRESS RELEASE

Criminal justice system is the foundation of social order

It is very clear, from the comments reported in the press in recent days, that the Minister for Home Affairs, the Inspector-General of Police and the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, among others, have wholly misconstrued the position of the Malaysian Bar in respect of the arrests of Fadiah Nadwa binti Fikri (Secretary), Murnie Hidayah binti Anuar, Puspawati binti Rosman, Ravinder Singh Dhalliwal (Chairperson) and Syuhaini binti Safwan from the KL Legal Aid Centre (“the LAC lawyers”).

The crux of the issue is that the LAC lawyers were arrested in the course of carrying out their professional obligations as advocates and solicitors, in accordance with the law of the land. There is a crucial difference between such detention and previous incidents where lawyers were arrested when acting as private citizens. There are sufficient guidelines to regulate the role and responsibilities of lawyers, which stipulate that lawyers should not place themselves in a position of conflict. The LAC lawyers were at the police station to render legal assistance, and at no time were they part of the alleged unlawful assembly.

Section 28A (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and Article 5 of the Federal Constitution guarantee an arrested individual’s right of access to a legal practitioner of his/her choice, and these provisions must be upheld. Logically, lawyers can only provide such legal assistance if they are present at the police station.

The Malaysian Bar is therefore neither seeking nor expecting preferential treatment nor exemptions from the law. It is seeking instead to uphold the fundamental right of lawyers to have access to their clients. It is this role that we are modelling.

The presence of a lawyer when an accused is questioned or arrested promotes accountability because lawyers serve as a check-and-balance, on the spot, against police excess. It must be remembered that the police force, as a law enforcement agency, commands far more physical and tangible power than any other public service agency, and hence a mechanism for accountability is all the more necessary. Access to legal counsel is thus a cornerstone of our criminal justice system, and a crucial safeguard for the rights of a detained person.

It is ironic that Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri should now characterise the Malaysian Bar’s intention to file suit over the arrests as “an attempt to intimidate enforcement authorities from discharging their duties” when, in reality, the arrests were clearly a form of harassment to obstruct the lawyers from discharging their responsibility to provide legal representation to their detained clients. It is not the action of the LAC lawyers that has undermined the legal system but rather the arbitrary action of the police in arresting them while they were performing their duty.

We shall proceed with legal action to determine the role and position of advocates and solicitors in such situations and to seek clarification of the scope of Section 28A (4) of the CPC, which we believe the police breached in this instance.

The government must accept dissent as a legitimate form of expression and a democratic norm. As much as it may be unpalatable, it must not be silenced but countered with reforms and concrete changes.

Ragunath Kesavan
President
Malaysian Bar

19 May 2009

Nazri IS WRONG

Nazri is WRONG...period. Taken below is an article from The Malaysian Insider.

Nazri's point is totally incorrect and bias.

The Malaysian Bar backed by about 13,000 lawyers in West Malaysia supported by their brother lawyers in East Malaysia namely Sarawak Bar Association agrees uneqivocally with the Bar Council to sue the government, inter alia, the Home Affair Minister and at the same time naming the IGP and the OCPD as Defendants for the police high-handed and abusive acts.

Not only that they are to be sued but at the same time society MUST condemned their action and MUST demand the resignations of all involved including the Home Affair Minister.

If what Nazri says that suing the government for the detention of five legal aid lawyers is an attempt to intimidate the enforcement authorities from discharging their duties, then what about lawyers who are actually discharging their constitutional and statutory duties.

Nazri should have known that the lawyers arrested, were called in by their clients to render legal assistance. The lawyers in fact requested to see the form (i.e. the form declaring that they wished not to have legal assistance), that were also denied by the police. What are there to hide? And instead of showing the declaration form, the police under the orders of the OCPD of Brickfields, arrested the five lawyers from the KL Legal Aid centre.

As such the police action is totally uncalled for, arbitary and have no respect for rights of the lawyers in discharging their constitutional and statutory duty.

Nazri: Bar Council’s decision to sue govt an attempt to intimidate

KUALA KANGSAR, May 17 – The decision by the Bar Council to sue the government over the May 7 detention of five legal aid lawyers is an attempt to intimidate the enforcement authorities from discharging their duties, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz said today.

He said it also showed that the legal practitioners themselves wanted to undermine the country’s legal system.

“The Bar Council is supposed to be a role model. If police enforce the law and among those caught are their (Bar Council) members, they have to accept it.

“We have the judiciary. Let the court decides whether the five lawyers are guilty or not,” he told reporters after opening a programme for Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) pupils in the Padang Rengas parliamentary constituency at the Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Temenggong, Kati here.

He was commenting on a resolution passed by the Bar Council at its extraordinary general meeting on Friday to sue the government and Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan over the detention of the five lawyers during the candlelight vigil for the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) activist Wong Chin Huat last week.

On the political crisis in Perak, Mohamed Nazri said, the court was the best avenue to settle the dispute and that there was no need for a fresh state election as the state legislative assembly was still intact.

“There is no hung assembly”, he said, adding that the request to dissolve the state assembly cannot not be made by the minority. – Bernama

Malaysian Bar demands....

Motion

Whereas on the night of 7 May 2009, five members of the Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre, Fadiah Nadwa binti Fikri (Secretary), Murnie Hidayah binti Anuar, Puspawati binti Rosman, Ravinder Singh Dhalliwal (Chairperson) and Syuhaini binti Safwan (collectively known as the “LAC Lawyers”), in their capacity as Advocates & Solicitors, had requested the police at the Brickfields Police Station for access to the detained persons who were arrested that same night whilst holding a candlelight vigil at the same Police Station over the recent arrest of political scientist Wong Chin Huat.

Whereas Article 5(3) of the Federal Constitution entrenches the fundamental right of a person to consult and be defended by the legal practitioner of his/her choice. Further, sub-sections 28A(2) to (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) set out in detail the rights of arrested persons including their right to communicate and consult with a legal practitioner of their choice.

Whereas the Police denied the LAC Lawyers access to the detained persons, the Police, without any reasonable grounds, proceeded to arrest the LAC Lawyers and only released them on police bail the following day at around 3 p.m., notwithstanding the repeated requests by other lawyers for their immediate release.

NOW IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT THE MALAYSIAN BAR:

1. Strongly condemns and denounces the wrongful arrest, detention and interrogation of the LAC Lawyers.

2. Strongly condemns and denounces the blatant transgression of the rule of law and the constitutional right of every person to counsel and access to justice.

3. Strongly condemns the unnecessary arrest and detention of those exercising their constitutional right to assemble peaceably.

4. Strongly condemns the arbitrary, improper and frequent resort by the Police to section 28A(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, thus denying an arrested person access to counsel and making the right provided under section 28A(3) meaningless.

5. Strongly condemns and denounces the appalling treatment of the LAC lawyers and all those held in custody, including compelling them to wear lock up uniforms and unnecessarily handcuffing them.

6. Strongly condemns and denounces the Police for deliberately refusing to disclose to their family or their lawyers any information in relation to the LAC lawyers after their arrest, including their location and their next course of action.

7. Demands the resignation of the Minister for Home Affairs, the Inspector-General of Police, OCPD ACP Wan Abdul Bari bin Wan Abdul Khalid and DSP Jude Pereira of the Brickfields police station over this shameful incident.

8. Condemns the gross abuse of police powers and demands that the Government offer an unconditional apology to the LAC Lawyers.

9. Demands that the Government commit to and uphold the Rule of Law as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

10. Reiterates its previous calls on the Government to establish the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) in its original form to serve as an independent external oversight mechanism.

11. Demands that the Government uphold and defend the fundamental rights of advocates and solicitors to discharge their responsibilities to their clients in an environment free from threats and intimidation and unhindered by law enforcement agencies.


Proposed by: Ragunath Kesavan
Dated: 8 May 2009

The motion, as amended, was unanimously carried.

Pakatan 10 Months VERSUS BN (50 odd years)

I read this article by the President of the Malaysian Bar. No wonder BN is so afraid of a snap election. Why? The Pakatan legitimate Government have done wonders during the 10 months in power compare to the BN illegitimate government where their predecessors took years and years and still not complete.

Below is the article by Dato' Ambiga, President of the Malaysian Bar.

The shocking display of vitriol against Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin of Perak by certain groups claiming to advance patriotism in Perak, is a disconcerting trend.

In a modern and robust democracy such as we claim to be, threats against those who hold different views, seek to enforce their legal rights or seek to challenge authority in a court of law are seriously misplaced. We cannot, on the one hand, claim to be a modern democracy that respects dissenting views and, on the other, ask for archaic modes of “punishment” (like chasing someone out of the State) for holding those views.

It is also necessary to remember that under Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin’s Administration in Perak, many significant steps forward were taken on issues that affect the Orang Asli and other underprivileged and marginalised groups.

I write this piece to put on record what I believe to be the most significant events from a human rights perspective: events that members of the Malaysian Bar and other NGOs were pleased to be part of. These issues that had remained outstanding for many years saw quick resolution in the last 10 months in Perak.

They include the following:

• As Menteri Besar, Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin cancelled all logging and plantation activities in Orang Asli settlements around Gopeng that were affecting more than 2000 Orang Asli.

• YB Sivanesan announced the return of approximately 400 acres of Orang Asli ancestral land to the Orang Asli that had been earmarked for logging activities by the previous government in Mukim Teja near Gopeng.

• The State Government announced the return of approximately 500 acres of Orang Asli ancestral land to the Orang Asli of Kampung Chang Sungai Gepai in Bidor, which had been earmarked for a Botanical Garden by the previous government.

• A special task force on Orang Asli land rights was set up to formally recognise all Orang Asli customary land in Perak. The task force committee comprises two tiers. The second tier is exclusively managed by the Orang Asli communities themselves, and meeting halls in the State Secretariat building are provided to the Orang Asli for their use.

• The Administration commissioned a special Orang Asli Officer for the state of Perak whose function is to resolve all problems of the Orang Asli within the state.

• A series of consultations with the public and NGOs on development activities in Ipoh has been held. For example, public opinion was sought in relation to the proposed development of Yau Tet Shin Market.

• Both Malay and Chinese residents of new villages and Kampung Tersusun are now being granted permanent land titles in stages.

The Malaysian Bar must put these events on record as we have worked for years on some of these issues and were happy to see positive results achieved in a short span of time.

We hope that the same importance will be given to these matters and that they will continue to progress without delay. In fact, we call on all State Governments to be pro-active in relation to issues that concern the Orang Asli, the marginalised and the underprivileged.


Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan
President
Malaysian Bar

11 February 2009

Press Conference by President of Malaysian Bar on Saiful's Medical Report

Very troubling reports have been published, which reveal the existence of a medical report of an examination done by a doctor on Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan a few hours before Saiful lodged a police report that he had been sodomised. The medical report apparently shows that there is no evidence that he had been sodomised by anyone.

Such reports raise some very serious questions that require immediate answers:

(1) Are the police in possession of such a medical report?

(2) Was the doctor concerned interviewed by the police and was he detained for any length of time?

(3) Is the doctor concerned facing any form of intimidation and if so, by whom?

(4) Is there a medical report by another doctor that either confirms or contradicts the first medical report?

(5) If it is true that the medical report exists showing a lack of prima facie evidence, what then could have been the justification for the vigorous actions taken against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as well as the public call by the authorities for his DNA sample?

The answers to these questions are of paramount importance, as they bring into focus the integrity of our law enforcement system.

These latest disclosures regarding the investigations into the sodomy allegations are not the only ones to raise questions that need answering. There is, for example, also the issue of P. Balasubramaniam’s abrupt “disappearance” that has yet to be satisfactorily explained. No one can deny that the circumstances of his first and second statutory declarations are highly unusual. All these show a pattern of events that cause much disquiet to right-thinking members of the public.

The Malaysian people are deeply troubled. A country that truly believes in the rule of law should not be faced with so many disturbing developments and unanswered questions.

The credibility of the Malaysian justice system as a whole is therefore at stake. The integrity of professionals, be they doctors or lawyers, must never be interfered with. The public must be left in no doubt that the criminal justice system in this country will not be misused or abused. There must be nothing less than an open and thorough investigation into these cases. This calls for the courage and professionalism of all those involved to do the right thing no matter the consequences. And those who have shown such courage and integrity must know that they live in a country where it is safe to do so.

Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan
President
Malaysian Bar

I am READY

I am READY. Come globalisation, DiSLY welcome the challenge. But then again whether my colleagues in the Bar is ready too. Well ball now on the Bar Council. But nevertheless I am READY and PREPARED. The question now is WHEN.

----- The Star

KUALA LUMPUR: The Government is keen on opening up the legal sector to international foreign firms particularly in specialised areas.

In an immediate response, the Bar Council said it was ready to open up in "permitted practice areas" and believed that liberalisation of the legal sector is something inevitable in today's age of globalisation.

At a press conference Monday, de facto Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said liberalising the legal profession has been talked about for a long time but it is time now "to put more energy and urgency" into it in view of the global economy.

"We must allow the realities of the market place to be a factor in our decision to open up. How do we retain our best lawyers if we don't have international law firms in our country?

"If we can have some well known international names here, then perhaps we can keep them (our lawyers) here. We must open up. We must have a competition policy. We must have freer trade and environment," he said, urging the Bar Council to sit down and focus on this again.

Zaid said that if Malaysia wanted to bring in big foreign investments and multinationals, it was important to open up the financial services sector and the legal profession.

"It is not the number of lawyers but the skills that we need to build up this country. The big foreign MNCs and big banks normally want to use lawyers that they feel will suit their needs.

"We cannot keep thinking of our own self-interest. We have to think in terms of the interest of the country," he said, adding that countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait had opened up their legal sector and reaped benefits from it through huge investments.

"If we want to continue to forge ahead and develop, then we should open up," adding that joint-ventures with the foreign firms might be one of the approaches.

Zaid said local law firms should not be afraid of the liberalisation because it would not impinge on their business.

He said this was because the liberalisation would be in selected specialised areas like intellectual property, maritime law, structured finance, banking and aviation law.

"We are not saying we are going to open up everything. Most international foreign firms are not interested in the small firms' businesses.

"Local firms business will not be jeopardised in areas where our standards are high," he said, adding that when foreign law firms were operating here this would also open up employment opportunities for local lawyers and for them to gain expertise.

Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said they are prepared for foreign firms to come in particularly in corporate transactions.

"It's inevitable. There are no two ways about it," she said, adding that the Bar Council had drafted up rules on the "permitted practice areas" that could be opened up.

The areas are transactions involving international capital market, asset securitisation which goes beyond the (yet to be determined) stipulated amount, transactions governed by foreign laws and those involving the Malaysian International Islamic Financial Centre (MIFC).

She said they were keen in joint-ventures between foreign and local firms in the MIFC but Bank Negara had asked to consider allowing standalone foreign firms and "we are looking at this proposal."

She said the Bar Council was working closely with the International Trade and Industry Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin in liberalising the legal sector to deal with trade negotiations like the Free Trade Agreements and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).

She said the Bar Council also reserved the right to increase the areas to be opened up.

"We are ready. We accept that we must be global," she said, adding that with the MIFC the opening up would be "faster than we think", possibly within a year.

She said the ultimate goal was to strike a balance by meeting the challenges of globalisation while at the same time promoting the interest of the local law firms.

Again on Ali Gostan

Sometimes I don't understand the mentality of UMNO senior vice president, Ali Gostan. Revoking a citizenship of a person is not an answer. So as a call for the use of the infamous ISA (detention without trial) for the lawyers that marched on Sunday morning, and worst still for Edmund Bon who merely explaining to DBKL officers who could never understand an explanation.

The lawyers and Bon, did not any time breached any laws that warrant an expulsion/revocation of their citizenship or a detention without trial under the ISA. They are not and never a threat to national security. It was a walk of peace and an explanation. As such this is something I don't understand the arbitrary powers of the authorities. There were no force used by the lawyers and Bon. What they did was to celebrate human rights in conjunction with the International Human Rights Day on Monday.

As such, Ali Gostan statement in Bernama is deplorable, unacceptable and SHOCKING showing a lack of understanding on the constitution, laws, accountability, integrity and transparency, responsible government and simply...MALAYSIAN

What wrong Bon committed?????

Edmund before the arrest

Bon explaining to DBKL officers

Bon Arrested

So if Khairy and UMNO can, why can't the Bar?
Double standard?????? OF COURSE, without a doubt.
Why don't arrest him too since there is no limitation period for a criminal wrong

What wrong did Edmund committed?

Something is so wrong with the authorities. Something is so wrong with DBKL and the POLICE. Between Khairy and Bon, Khairy did a CRIMINAL ACT whereas Bon did nothing WRONG....

I urged the authorities to arrest Khairy for illegal demonstration....

*All pics from Bar Council's website

It's confirmed MALAYSIA is a POLICE STATE

I'm utterly disgusted and embarrassed by the unilateral and arbitrary abuse of police power in arresting my friend, Mr Edmund Bon, Chairman of the Human Rights Committee of the Bar Council. He was arrested in a mafia-style Hollywood type by the police. I, together with all right minded Malaysian, am ashamed of this abuse of police powers. It was a total disregard of the constitutions, and any laws of this country. What Bon did was explaining to DBKL officers that the banners were in private property and subsequently a senior police personnel arrested him. This is definitely a coward act by the powers that be.

As a concerned citizen, right minded Malaysian and a fellow member of the Bar, I call upon the immediate release of E. Bon and all members that were arrested together.

I now call upon the resignation of the Inspector General of Police for his failure to uphold the constitution and protecting the innocence.

I further call the resignation of the the Internal Security Minister and the Home Affair Minister for their failure to uphold the constitution and carry out the duties of their high offices.

Enough is enough

BAR wants Royal Commission

Ambiga Sreenevasan

President
Malaysian Bar

The Bar Council notes with concern, following from the press conference held by the panel investigating the video clip, the narrow scope of the panel’s terms of reference which appears to be restricted solely to determining the authenticity of the video clip. The Bar Council is also concerned that the panel, having acknowledged its lack of powers in compelling the production of evidence, does not intend to invite any person to come forward to assist the panel or to give a statement. It further has no power to direct investigations. Neither has it immunity.

It would appear, therefore, that the Panel is wholly dependent on the investigations carried out by other agencies. The Bar Council hopes to raise these issues with the panel shortly.

It has always been the stand of the Bar Council that this panel can only constitute a first step in the wider process of ascertaining the facts and inferences in relation to the video tape. A Royal Commission is required for this purpose for the very reasons the panel has put forward about its powers and immunity, among other things.

The action taken by the ACA, at this stage of the investigation, to find out about the whistleblower, is worrying and most discouraging. It shows the misplacement of focus, and creates an impression that the authorities are more interested in going after the whistleblower than in discovering the truth of the alleged wrongdoings.

What lah, Nazri?

Another show of stupidity by Mr. Minister. Language used confirmed that he is one. From the starting of the letter till the ending showing nothing but stupidity and nothing short of no common sense. I post below taken from the Star...

I think Mr Minister has misunderstood not once but many times in his expression from the letter. Either he misunderstood or that he just cannot understand simple English. Remember, the Bar march not to see the sacking of the CJ, but merely to ask for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to set up due to the recent scandal and a wash up in the judiciary so that the public will have greater confidence in it.

As such his explanation is nothing more than just denial after denial by people in high places.

Nazri explains statement on 'lawyer's protest'

© The Star (Letters Section) (Used by permission) by Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz Minister in The Prime Minister's Department WHAT I like about your paper is because it has been very fair to me. Once again, I seek your forbearance to allow me to explain my statement about "Lawyer's protest" which was quoted and commented upon by Wong Chun Wai in his recent article. Fundamental to the concept of an independent judiciary is the non-interference of either the executive or the legislative in the judiciary. I believe this was the reason the lawyers in Pakistan protested, because there was interference by the executive in the judiciary when President Gen Pervez Musharraf sacked the CJ of Pakistan. However, in Malaysia, it is the other way around. Lawyers took to the streets to ask the executive to interfere in the judiciary. They were asking the Prime Minister to take action against the CJ. Hence the term "unbecoming" used by me in describing the action of the lawyers. As to the immediate dismissal of their proposal, it is only because I have dealt with this matter earlier with the members of the Bar, including attending a forum organised by them on the same issue and on both occasions I have said the stand of the government is No. Also, as an insider, I do know the Government is comfortable with the present arrangement in appointing judges as accorded by the Constitution, coupled by the Prime Minister's stance of keeping at arm's length decisions made by judges. The Deputy Prime Minister has also said there is no necessity at the moment to form a Royal Commission to appoint and promote judges. I have always been direct, and see no point in giving hope when there is none. I have been informed there are 13,000 registered members of the Bar, and 1,000 protesting lawyers is hardly a majority and compared with the 10,000,000 voters, it is a drop in the ocean. I believe the opposition will make an election issue out of this. Let us wait for the people to decide in the coming general election. I do not know whether I am right or wrong but if I do err, I am very sure it is on the right side.

Another Minister talking S***

I must say another minister talking shit. I guess our Minister of Information got the clip video information wrong. He says that the video is taken from a blog site. The whole wide world knows that the source came from Anwar. Maybe he should be sacked as Information Minister. What an embarrassment to the PM for having Minister "separuh jalan". Is the Bar Council acted professionally? I think they are as lawyers are officers of the court (Karpal Singh v PP) . AND Lawyers are duty bound to uphold the dignity of the judiciary and the profession. Are we being influenced by Opposition party? I think NOT. Maybe Zam should get his facts right before commenting as he not only embarrass himself but an insult to the PM for appointing him.

----- Taken from Bernama

SUNGAI PETANI, Sept 28 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian Bar Council has been told to rid itself of political influence so as to remain a professional body.

Information Minister Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin said the council should act professionally to be respected and should not allow itself to be used by certain individuals for their own political interest.

He said the Bar Council was no longer professional by pressuring the government to set a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the unauthenticated video clip of a telephone conversation of a senior lawyer purportedly brokering the appointment of judges in 2002.

In light of this, he added, the Bar Council members should call for a commission be set up to investigate the unprofessional conduct of their leaders.

Zainuddin believed the video clip was not valid as it only carried the visual and audible conversation of a lawyer and it was picked from a blogsite on the Internet.

He was speaking at a breaking of fast with members of the Kampung Hilir Smart Community programme in Merbok Thursday night.

Zainuddin said although the video clip was unverified, the government had been transparent about it by forming an independent panel to investigate the allegation.

He said the Bar Council should be thankful for the government's effort and should not continue to pressure for the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry.

He also hit out at certain media for giving wide coverage on the video clip issue whereas they should act based on facts and professionally.

On Wednesday, more than 1,500 members of the Bar Council march from the Palace of Justice to Dataran Putra in Putrajaya to hand over a memorandum calling on the government to set up a Royal Commission to investigate the video clip issue, and for transparency in the appointment of court judges.

For Justice Sake

I received an sms from a client at around 3.15pm saying, "Thank You". I replied "Welcome, but what is it for". And he replied, "for marching for us". A simple reply but speaks a thousand words. I suddenly remember that I am, an officer of the court, the bulwark of civil liberties.

"When lawyers marched, something is wrong" said Bar Council chairwoman, Miss Ambiga Sreenevasan. This indeed is true. It is a rare march. The Malaysian Bar don't march for just everything like what political parties do whether opposition or BN. The Malaysian Bar will march when there is no other way to go about it. The march was done professionally and with firmness. We were blocked by the police from going to the Palace of Justice, at Putrajaya. We went to another exit albeit a much longer one. But we were persistent because we know the fight for justice is crucial.

Something is dead wrong for the police to block the road. Something is dead wrong with the judiciary and that is why we march. We march for justice sake. We want it to be cleaned. We want the whole system to be overhauled so as to see that Justice is not only be done but seen to be done. There were placards demanding the sacking of the Chief Justice together with banners saying Bersihkan Badan Kehakiman, Selamatkan Badan Kehakiman, "No to Corruption" and the likes. There were also chants like "Who are we?" and the crowd shouted "Malaysian Bar", "What do we want?", and a loud cry from the people, "Justice!"

Before the march, there were many disappointments and discouragement such as those from the government that says that the Bar stoop so low like the Opposition and that from the Muslim Lawyer group. Especially to the group, I think more is demanded from them by the people. There is no doubt that the people is now looking at us

Real Stupid Fella.....so ARROGANT

I am disgusted with old Nazri. What a stupid fella. I think he is the most damn arrogant person on earth right now. He was commenting on lawyers marching the "Walk for Justice" as "brains are like opposition party". Maybe Nazri has brains like government dog and a jackass. A real idiot he is.

I think the Bar will not want to have anything to do with him any more. The Bar Council and all Malaysians has the right to call the government for the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Hostility to wards the Government.....pooordah

Nazri branded the Bar Council’s plan to hold a march on Wednesday to press for investigation into the scandal as an attempt to display ‘hostility’ and as support of the opposition. He says, “Lawyers are officials of the court, they have a place in the society. They shouldn’t behave like the opposition.”

He further says, “If they want to stoop so low and go there like opposition demonstration, certainly they will lose my respect because I have been having a very good relationship with the Bar.

Mr. Minister, you are dead wrong. Yes lawyers are officers of the court and as such owe a duty to protect the courts from being used as blardieeeeee tool to some very unscrupulous and irresponsible people. The judiciary must be free and independent from the government. The judiciary is the bulwark of civil liberties. AND that has to be respected.

The Bar Council is not being hostile but basically wanting to protect what that has been a disgrace to the community and society. In fact the government should and must confront this root of evil and do something positive. As such what the Chairperson of the Malaysian Bar says is true that the Malaysian Bar stands up for justice. It is non-partisan and only issue orientated. Justice is for all people, regardless of political persuasions and that the present situation is a matter of justice, AND not politics.

As such I hope the Minister can just at this point of time think as a person not affiliate with party politics.