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

I can't understand the reason of imposing another criterion for legal profession in establishment of a new firm as experience shall not be determined solely based on the years of practice.

For instance, if a person has been practising in a conveyancing area but nevertheless wishes to venture into a new area of practice, the same may also be regarded as inexperience in that particular area of law.

As such, I personally disagree that such criterion to be enacted or imposed on the new lawyers and no such requirement imposed on other professions thus far.(correct me if I'm wrong).

Tong Kuan Ling

What is the criteria to confirm if a lawyer 'ada pengalaman'??

Another attempt to shift the goalpost, when the real problem is elsewhere??

If the government is concerned of dishonest lawyers, then sack the Education Minister for not educating appropriate ethics and moral to young Malaysian. If a person is inherently dishonest, what good would 'pengalaman cukup' be?

If the government is concerned of incompetent lawyers, then review the Law programme at our Universities, and review the list of universities that our students can enrol to.

Even if we fix the time limit to 3 years, before on can set up one's own firm, what guarantee that the lawyer would be 'cukup pengalaman'?

My personal experience is that lawyers who are incompetent and/or dishonest, will be one whether or not they have 'pengalaman'. The attitude of the lawyer comes from the surrounding circumstances. If the young lawyer grew up in an atmosphere where:-

1. DPM is sacked for allegation of sodomy

2. Corruption happens (and yet very little is done to enforce)

3. Where the Government knowing full well that some bodies like the Police are corrupt and yet still dont want to start IPCMC

4. Have a former Prime Minister who can run a regime of hostility and corruption (and then attack the current PM for doing the very same thing this former PM was doing)

etc etc... what would you expect the young person to learn?

These younger lawyers are born in 1980s..
They have seen the ugly head of corruption
Abuse of powers (see UMNO last general assembly when they decided to do a Chinese bashing) going on without any punishment.
They see the major debacle and scandals (Bank Bumi, Perwaja Steel, MAS, the Klang Free Trade Port).

They grew up in an atmosphere that 'its cool to be mediocre, cool to be evil, and cool to corrupt' cause you are never gonna get caught.''

We have these young Malaysians living in THIS kind of condition, and then the government want to demand that lawyers must be 'more pengalaman' before they can set up their firm?

Richard Wee Thiam Seng

Is it a slow day in the office?

My advice to the Law Minister is to focus on the really important issues. The one that comes to mind is the Judicial Appointments Commission. If the Law Minister is serious about the JAC, get on with it.

Why sidetrack and in the process get entangled with who can and cannot open up their own law firms.

Dipendra A/L Harshad Rai

Richard Wee and Dipendra (my crony??),

Well said. To reinforce your argument, a wit once said that what Malaysia need is honest people, not brilliant people. Honest people will do the job, nothing flash, but the job gets done. Brilliant people will sometimes be betrayed by their very brilliance. (Actually, Richard, I said this, although I consider myself brilliant! Haha! The dummer just died and I have to beat my own drum.)

Anyway, seriously, the legal profession is a self-regulating profession with defined statutory powers. That is a question for the members of the Malaysian Bar itself to address.

The Minister will be well advised to leave things be. He may even advise the Bar Council on the merits of his suggestion. But it must remain a suggestion.

The problem with Malaysia is that most politicians, having breathed rarefied air (don't know from where), rush into areas where angels fear to thread and mess up big time.

Look at our mass media. The ownership pattern is a standing challenge to a free media. And where is it going? The answer will be a sad one. Let me be polite and just say that people bank on the alternative media. Why? It was never like that when we got our Independence in 1957. It was never like this even in the mid-1970s. Political interference, you say?

Look at our education system. Look at the mess. All due to the "good intentions" of our politicians.

Look at our health system. It is an ongoing problem. All due to the "good intentions" of our politicians.

For that matter, look at our civil service. Is it neutral? Or has the politicisation of the civil service, including promoting the kaki bodek and ahli Umno, contributed to the rot?

I verily believe that politicians should focus on policy matters. Make good policy and ensure that this is observed. Leave the operational and implementation part to the civil servants, including our uniformed units like the army, police, customs and immigration officers.

Stephen Tan Ban Cheng

My concern is the yardstick that will be applied to measure "experience". Does someone who has been called to the Bar 20 or so years ago, hardly ever appears in Court or applies his mind to substantive conveyancing or corporate work, spends most of his time lobbying for legal work from Financial/Institutional/Corporate/Government and GLC clients, is busy managing his firm and making sure the rest of the lawyers do the actual work and is active in politics (phew!!), qualify? (sorry, lack of full stop is due to force of habit)

Balvinder Singh Kenth

Is this for the sake of globalisation, or on the pretext of it - so that eventually, ALL LEGAL FIRMS might be amalgamated - as had been done in Malaysia for the BANKING SECTOR, into a selected few - so as to be prepared to face the world's legal firms entering Malaysia? Please do not deceive us, nor should we allow ourselves or our members to be deceived!

Tan Peek Guat