Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

Lord President Tun Mohamed Salleh Abas claims he is shocked to learn that the Bar Council had erred in granting consultant status to retired judges.

With whatever respect due to the man - I am bemused that he should be shocked at anything since his biggest screw up in the decision of Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang & Another case [1988] 1 CLJ 219 - is still being felt by every citizen in Malaysia and has facilitated the huge corruption machinery that is now the Malaysian government. Instead of atoning for his error in humility, he went and accepted money for his unconstitutional removal instead of enduring it stoically and demonstrating that money cannot atone for everything - least of all the rape of the judiciary. And this is the same man who turned away the Bar Council in 1988 when they went to lend him their support.

So Tun Salleh, please don't just fade away slowly - fade quickly. Leave the profession now I say. You were of no service to it on the Bench, you are of even lesser service to it at the Bar. And don't pretend to be shocked by the Bar Council's errors because you still have lots to be shocked about yours back in 1988.

Fahri Azzat

Walaupun Tun dikatakan telah membuat kesilapan dalam Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang & Another case [1988] 1 CLJ 219, keputusannya kekal mengikat. Walau apa pun perasaan kita sama ada beliau telah melakukan kesilapan kecil atau besar, ia tetap duluan yang mengikat (binding precedent). Salah atau benar, kita terpaksa ikut.

Walau apa pun jua perasaan Ahli-Ahli Majlis Peguam terhadap kesilapan yang dilakukan oleh pembesar-pembesar masa lampau, ia telah mencipta satu duluan, sama ada mengikat atau tidak, semua pihak terutamanya ahli-ahli Badan Peguam berhak tahu apa yg membuatkan pembesar-pembesar masa lampau membuat keputusan sedemikian. Adakah hanya kesilapan yg tidak dapat dipralihat, kesilapan yang tidak disengajakan, kesilapan yang disengajakan atau kerana saiz kerangka firma yang menaungi pemohon terdahulu yang diambil kira. Kerana kesilapan terdahulu dibuat oleh panel yg terdiri daripada 12-36 orang.

Just curious.

Dara Waheda Mohd Rufin

P/s: Please lah, enough with this racist biasness thingy being used as point of argument...

Komen yang dibuat oleh Encik Mohd Allaudin bin Mat Nor adalah tidak wajar dan tidak berasaskan kepada sebarang fakta. Perkara yang betul adalah sesuatu yang perlu dipertahankan tidak kira apajua kesannya. Di dalam melakukan perkara yang betul tidak ada ruang untuk pilih bulu atau mengamalkan sikap perkauman.

Sekiranya Majlis Peguam pada dahulunya telah tersilap didalam meluluskan permohonan konsultansi bekas Hakim Dato’ KC Vohrah dan Allahyarham Dato’ Haji Abu Mansor bin Ali, maka mengapakah masih ada pihak yang cuba memainkan isu ‘perkauman’ dan ‘pilih bulu’?

Encik Edmund Bon telah memberikan penjelasan yang kukuh dan munasabah, dan tidak ada sebab mengapa kita harus dengan sikap tidak bertanggungjawab sewenang-wenangnya melontarkan tohmahan tanpa mengemukakan sebarang fakta untuk membuktikan alegasi yang Majlis Peguam mengamalkan sikap 'pilih bulu' atau 'perkauman'.

Janganlah kita sebagai peguam menjadi seperti ahli politik yang acapkali memainkan retorik perkauman.

Dan janganlah kita lupa bahawa kita semua adalah rakyat Malaysia dan mempunyai darah yang sama merahnya.

Amer Hamzah Arshad

Two points:

(1) Engleesh

“I wish to slowly fade away from the legal scene and it is my desire nevertheless to still maintain a close relationship with the firm I helped established and, if possible, without the burden of being a partner.

"Helped established" - whose mistake? Tun Salleh's mistake or the sub-editor's. I would hate it if it is established to be Tun Salleh's mistake since it had come from a former Lord President.

(2) Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang & Another [1988] 1 CLJ 219

That 1988 decision sucks. Among others was Tun Salleh's incredibly narrow construction of "locus standi."

It can be seen from the instant waiver issue and the aforesaid that three distinct pictures are coming out of the jurist, the man and the myth.

Indeed, one of the speculations bandied about within journalism circles at the height of the judicial crisis was that the powers-that-be was unsure of the political stability of some of our Judges. This view emerged after Tun Salleh empanelled the full nine-Judge coram, most of whom were, so to speak, subsequently thrown into the deep end.

Stephen Tan Ban Cheng

1. One way to look at the personal remarks would be to consider it a 'counter-claim' aimed, presumably, at encouraging a conclusion that Tun is deficient on some level.

This does not, of course, detract from the fact that there is still the small matter of the former Lord President's 'claim'.

Speaking purely out of academic interest, it would have been interesting to consider whether:

(a) 'waive' simply means 'refrain from insisting or enforcing' Rule 60 (see http://www.answers.com/waive) [Tun's position];

OR

(b) 'waive' means the "amendment"/"abolition" of Rule 60 for all applicant's. [Bar's position - as I understood it]

Whatever the case, as evident by Tun's press statement, the proverbial 'Notice of Discontinuance' has been issued and my academic interest is rendered, well, academic.

2. Vis a vis Engleesh, everyone makes mistakes. That said, I doubt the Council's decision not to 'waive' had anything to do with the Lord President's English.

Heck, sometimes quotes can even be attributed to the wrong person. Eh Stephen?

Stephen Tan Ban Cheng wrote:
We make mistakes, all of us. The point is how fast we realise these and then how fast we apologise. But oh, the Bard said, what a wicked web we weave when first we learn to deceive!

Dear Stephen et al.,

Thank you for artfully highlighting one of the biggest misquotes or misdirections of all time to subtly emphasize your point about mistakes. I salute you, my dear sir.

By that, I am alluding to the perennial question as to whether the quote is truly attributable to Shakespeare or Sir Walter Scott.

"Google" it and a merry chase commences from Flodden Field. Ending perhaps at the doorstep of a Bard. Scottish or English, you tell me.

3. On a final note, I would like to point out that I have always found that the Bar encourages the participation of all communities at the Bar. In fact, there is no better testament to this than the fact that Council members and Presidents of the Bar have come from various ethnicities.

In fact, if we believe in the origin of Man in the Biblical or Quranic sense that we all came from Adam, then the guy or girl next to each of us is just our brother or sister.

Of course if anyone subscribes to Darwin's Theory of Evolution, well ...

Nizam Bashir

“I wish to slowly fade away from the legal scene and it is my desire nevertheless to still maintain a close relationship with the firm I helped established and, if possible, without the burden of being a partner," said Salleh Abbas.

However, since Abas' decision in the famous case of " 'Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang in 1988' had negatively affected public interest litigation in Malaysia", Abbas now owes all our citizens of Malaysia his duty of having to explain and provide us with his legal reasonings behind/which had governed his decisions (which had been made without sufficient regard and concern for public interest litigation) in that legal matter.

Since Salleh Abbas had allowed himself to be put into the limelight, and also, since he had allowed for some parties to have acted so without paying much 'respect' for the Bar Council, we might as well also allow this light which had been ignited by 'him' to be shining through himself as well.

Justice means being fair to one and ALL.

After his explanation, then only can we citizens of Malaysia grant to Abbas his wish of "slowly fading away from the legal scene".

Tan Peek Guat

En Mohd Alauddin,

Bulu apa yang dipilih? Perlukan kita membuat andaian bahawa setiap keputusan yang dibuat oleh pihak bukan Melayu terhadap orang Melayu merupakan satu keputusan yang berdasarkan ataupun berbau perkauman? Kenapa begitu En Alauddin? "Inferiority complex" kah kita orang orang Melayu sehingga perlu meniup semarak api perkauman setiap kali kita mengahadapi kaum lain ataupun apa-apa keputusan yang tidak berpihak kepada kita?

Cik Dara Wahida,

Keputusan Saleh Abas di Mahkamah Agung itu sememangnya satu duluan mengikat walaupun ianya salah! Tetapi keputusan Bar Council yang dahulu itu bukannya duluan yang mengikat Council yang terkemudian. Itu satu praktis yang salah dan tidak perlu diikuti oleh Council yang terkemudian. Apa yang mahu disiratkan oleh saudari?

Fahri et al,

I have said it and I will say it again. Saleh Abas sent the wrong signal to Mahathir Mohamad in the Lim Kit Siang case. He precipitated the rape of the judiciary. He is responsible for that, at least partly. He is shocked at the Bar Council's error? Well mate, I have been shocked by his decision for about 20 years now.

Azhar B Azizan @ Harun

The Tun is quoted as saying “In none of these correspondences has the Bar Council ever provided any explanation other than that I have not met with the requirement of Rule 60(1) of the Legal Profession (Practice & Etiquette) Rules 1978 as I have not been in active practice for at least 20 years" So what more do you need to say? The Tun does not qualify.

How then do you waive the rule? That is the legal problem I am trying to grapple with. I can waive an entitlement which is to my benefit or I ask the Bar Council to waive a disability that I am subject to. But the inability to call myself a Consultant is not a disability, it is a privilege which is only open to me if I qualify. Clearly KC Vohrah did not qualify so on what basis did the then Bar waive the rule? And why does the present Bar Council keep saying that they are not responsible for that decision. The persons who make up the Bar Council may change but the entity is perpetual so to the present office bearers please rectify the error, if any, of your predecessors.

Robert Lazar