The Bar Council Maligned
The Malaysian Bar Council is a statutory body everyone loves to bitch, whine, moan and complain about; from the public, politicians, government, and especially its very own lawyers. Hardly a day goes by without some lawyer belting out their righteous indignation on whatever media about how the Bar Council is not doing this or that, or not enough of that or this, should be doing this or that, at how disappointed, angry, frustrated, etc., they are. There is no doubt about it, the Bar Council is an easy elbow-distance target, and easy targets are easier to hit. So frustrated and disappointed are some of its critics they claim their disappointment with the Bar Council drove them not to even commence practice. To these idealistic snowflakes, I wish them all the best in what they do next. May they thrive in greener pastures. Just don’t let your ass hit the ancient gates of law on the way out; those things cost a lot of money. The easily disappointed are not meant for the rigours of the law. It is their good fortune to recognize their shortcoming early and spare us their future whines and complaints. Their expectations are misplaced. They did not come to serve the law, the court, or its clients, or they expected to do so in conditions ideal to themselves. They expected a nest before bending to pick up a twig, and a standing ovation after doing so. If you come to the law to be inspired or to realize your ideas or for a comfortable life, disappointment awaits. The practice of law is either an anti-climax or a disappointment in some shape or form; like everything that becomes a chore at some point. However, you can bear it all if you understand this: As much as you love the law and the practice of law, it will not love you back. All you can do is be content loving the law and its practice for its own sake. The pleasure and love for legal practice come not only from satisfying wins or deserved losses and settled fees; in fact, it comes primarily from its practice and process, the friendships formed and the camaraderie enjoyed whilst practicing, and its many other delightful ornaments. I know I sound insane writing this because some days I don’t feel it but most days, I still think it a privilege and a pleasure to help those with legal problems and issues. It is a blast to draft contracts or cause papers, examine witnesses in court, argue an appeal, and do or savour everything that comes with being a lawyer, and a reasonable fee, of course. It is a privilege and pleasure to be trusted and relied on by those that need me and place their trust in me. I enjoy exploring or arguing pointless legal issues with my lawyer friends. I take pleasure in reading and writing articles and essays about the law and its practice. Those are some of the main reasons I came to the law and stayed; it never was for money alone. Money is important, of course, but its importance is limited to fueling the enterprise of legal practice. I think of my firm as a pinball machine I am addicted to. My role is simply to earn money to keep playing the pinball machine. The pinball machine represents the pleasure and joy of working with people I like and doing legal work with and serving clients we like. Money alone cannot be the purpose for legal practice, and if it is, there are faster ways to make more money than a being lawyer. My elation or disappointment with the Bar Council has absolutely nothing to do with my legal work and pleasures with the law. They are tangential to each other. Do the present barrage of complaints leveled recently against the Bar Council being incompetent, not doing enough, etc., have a basis? I think that needs to be assessed within the context of the Bar Council’s statutory duties under the Legal Profession Act 1976 (Act 166); not just whatever we feel they should do as a matter of logic or convenience. The Bar Council’s purpose is set out in section 42(1) of the Act. There are 14 purposes and these are sub provisions (a) to (n). Below I drew up a list of what I culled from the Bar Council website and my own meager memory of what the Bar Council has done in relation to its purposes: Section 42(1) should be our guide about what we can expect from the Bar Council. It will ensure our expectations and demands of the Bar Council are consistent with its statutory purposes. It reminds us of the competing and sometimes contradictory demands on the Bar Council. It is hoped this awareness will temper and bring some restraint to the complaints lobbied. I doubt it. Most importantly, I hope it guards against expectation creep. That is where we are at now. The expectation of the Bar Council has creeped far beyond its statutory purpose; the Bar Council is the skinny boy dressed and hyped to be this great warrior that his people are constantly sacrificing on the altar of unreasonable expectations and lack of empathy. An example of expectation creep is the recent demand, amongst others, on the Bar Council to do something about its ‘sexual misconduct mechanism’. I don’t think it’s the Bar Council’s business to set anything up. My reason is this: Sexual misconduct or sexual harassment is a subject matter of an industrial relations complaint, or a tortious claim; or a criminal complaint. The remedy is threefold; lodge a complaint with the employer about the matter, sue for sexual harassment, the Malaysian courts fashioned a cause of action for such victims for that very purpose, or file a police report for outrage of modesty or use of physical force. A victim can take all actions simultaneously without one waiting for the other. They will have the
