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

Number of Members present: Not available

Motion 1:

That it be resolved that the Bar Council shall with effect from 1st January, 1988 remit to the various State Bars all contributions made by Members of the various State Bars to the Bar Council Building Fund to be used by the various State Bars for the purpose of purchasing a building in each of the various State Bars in the name of the Bar Council.

Resolution:

It was unanimously decided that the Motion be adopted and the date of implementation be 1st January, 1989.

Motion 2:

Whereas the Malaysian Bar views with grave concern the ever increasing number of complaints of acts of dishonesty relating to solicitors’ clients’ account AND WHEREAS the Malaysian Bar considers it expedient/necessary to minimise and/or eliminate such incidences: THE MALAYSIAN BAR HEREBY RESOLVES AND DIRECT THE BAR COUNCIL OF THE STATES OF MALAYA FORTHWITH TO SEEK THE APPROPRIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCOUNTANT’S REPORT RULES, 1978 WHEREBY IT SHALL BE INCUMBENT UPON EVERY SOLICITOR TO ATTACH THE MONTHLY BANK STATEMENTS RESPECTING EACH AND EVERY CLIENT’S ACCOUNT, AS MAY BE, TO THE ACCOUNTANT’S REPORT.

The Motion was withdrawn.

Motion 3:

Whereas on October 30th 1987 the Singapore Government arbitrarily declared that Param Cumaraswamy as the President of the Malaysian Bar together with three others namely Dr. Chandra Muzzafar, Mr Gurmit Singh and Dr Jomo Sundram will be banned from entry into Singapore and whereas the only reason given for the said ban was that they interfered with the internal affairs of Singapore when they spoke out against detention of the 22 persons under the Internal Security Act in April, 1987. In the light of the above members present at this Annual General Meeting hereby resolve that:

The Bar Council on behalf of the members of the Bar send an official letter to the Singapore Embassy condemning the ban on the four from entry into the Republic of Singapore and request the Singapore Government to lift the ban.

Resolution:

The Motion was unanimously adopted.

Follow-up Action:

The President issued a press statement in response but both the Malaysian and Singapore Straits Times only published a couple of sentences from the statement.

Motion 4:

(i) The members of the Bar NOTING the rearrest of Mr Karpal Singh, a member of the Bar on 9th March, 1988 at the roadblock at Nibong Tebal at about 8.30 p.m. after the High Court of Malaya at Ipoh had on the same day in the morning ordered his release on the ground that his detention without trial under the Internal Security Act was unlawful.

(ii) REAFFIRMING its stand that the ISA is an obnoxious legislation undermining fundamental human rights, basic democratic principles and the rule of law.

(ii) OBSERVING that in the judgment of the High Court of Malaya at Ipoh on 8th March, 1988 the detention of Mr Karpal Singh was unlawful even within the terms of the statute itself.

(iii) HEREBY RESOLVES that the rearrest of Mr Karpal Singh is a flagrant abuse of power by the detaining authorities and an excessive executive act which undermines the rule of law.

(iv) AND HEREBY CALLS FOR the immediate unconditional release of Mr Karpal Singh or that he be forthwith charged and tried in a court of law.

Resolution:

It was unanimously decided that Motion 4 be adopted.

In view of Resolution No. 4, Motion No. 5 was withdrawn.

Motion No. 6 was defeated by majority of 19 for and 54 against.

Motion No. 7 was defeated by majority of 20 or and 51 against.