WHO IDENTIFY THE SPECIFIC BEFORE WE PROCEED

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:59:47 +0100

My dear David Mathew Your comments on the CLP are laudable. They are noble and balanced. However, as an observer who has never taken the scandal-marred CLP, I am of the view that something must be wrong when so many holders of the LL.B. degree cannot pass the CLP. I am of the considered view that the CLP has become a WALL of hindrance instead of the BRIDGE of help that it was originally intended and designed to be for law graduates of Britain. This WALL is now extended to graduates from Australia and New Zealand. It is regrettable that the same mark of nobility and balance does not attend your pointed comments of the "past two years," specifically: "... the Bar Council decided that there can be an AGM without a quorum and it continued this year when the Bar Council was not alive and alert to implications of the LPA amendments on members of the Bar occasioning the EGMs that took place. These events have lowered the standing of the Bar in the eyes of the public and that is truly unfortunate. I hope that what happened to the Bar over the past two years never repeats itself. It is important that there should be humility as only then we can move forward again as a united Bar." So what is your message? Is that not an invitation to look at a specific to make a generalisation? Are we not indulging in induction to make a wicked conclusion? Can you please elaborate the specific before we go on to the generalisation? For all you know, the specific may not even withstand the scrutiny of a debate? Before we indulge in the debate, please be aware that the onerous requirement of the quorum has been around for far too long and that its original purpose has outlived its usefulness. If we cannot, as a collective Bar, summon enough courage to take the bull by the horns after its outlived usefulness, then do we wait for change by purely waiting instead of taking a calculated position to question it? Of course, David, we must also look at the surrouding circumstances and make our own overall evaluation of what has happened? There were other changes being made and there were other players who I think they enjoy the monopoly of having the interests of the entire Malaysian Bar. Please elaborate and I can have an open debate with you - provided that we debate without outsiders presernt so that it can be conducted without the cavalier threats of defamation being throw about. All who come must come to hear and dispense their fight to a defamation. - Stephen Tan Ban Cheng

CLP - Cancer to Legal Profession

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:24:20 +0100

Great interview David, couldn't help but notice your views on Certificate of Legal Practice. Many dread to sit for CLP but for the unfortunate circumstances where other avenues are not available, CLP is their only saviour. My heart goes for those who share this predicament. I am still at a lost especially when people speak of how they pass their CLP in the first attempt and for that mere fact, it ought to be retained because they felt that only the deserving gets to eat the cherry. I did it in my maiden attempt and I do admit that there is a lot of hard work and sacrifice, but criticism levied against the system has not been answered head on. Just denying there is a quota or by saying that those who deserve to fail ought to fail isn't a reply, at best only an attempt to shut down arguments. First, people who graduated from local universities, why shouldn't they be subject to the same entry examination. With a common examination, detractors will have one less issue to pick on. At the same time, we will now know for a fact whether foreign graduates fail because they are not used to way CLP questions are drafted or merely because they are not up to the bar. Secondly, why are candidates seated at different locations according to their number of attempts? Does it matter to the examiner which candidate ought to pass according to their peseverance? Thirdly, what real value does CLP add to our legal profession? Do they become better draftsman, do their know their law better, are they exposed to the practical aspect of it or does it become a 1 year intensive memory work merely for the candidates to get their passing mark? We are wasting enthusiasm and good contribution to the bar as long as there is CLP. The exception to the general entry route has become so synonymous with legal aspirants. The credibility of CLP ought to be restored and if it cannot, it has outlived its natural life. No amount of tutorial hours or lectures is going to churn out good lawyers. Afterall, the life of law is one of experience. - Ng Chung Yee

YL Personality: David Dinesh Mathew

WHO IDENTIFY THE SPECIFIC BEFORE WE PROCEED

CLP - Cancer to Legal Profession