The Malaysian Bar - YL Personality: Mishant a/l Thiruchelvam

Home

Committees

National Young Lawyers

YL Personality: Mishant a/l Thiruchelvam

Thursday, 22 February 2007 07:11am

Contributed by National Young Lawyers Committee

“Chastity belts comment uncalled for and demeaning”

Mishant a/l Thiruchelvam was called to the Bar in September 2006 and currently works in a medium sized firm in Subang Jaya, Selangor. A budding lawyer in the practice of general litigation and corporate work recently, he had the opportunity to share his views with Ng Chung Yee, the Selangor representative on the NYLC

How has practice been treating you from chambering days?

The practice of law was initially tough for me, but nevertheless rewarding. I was made to slog my way through the full 9 months doing litigation and corporate work.

Although I barely dealt with conveyancing matters, my former Master had always advocated that a “true blue” lawyer should be well versed in all areas of the law. In short, I had no choice but also to learn the ropes of conveyancing and all other areas of the law. Hopefully it will come in handy some day.

What do you find as the toughest obstacle as a chambering pupil?

I would want to say it is the law and the practice of it, but in reality the major struggle for a chambering pupil like me was managing my personal finances. The allowance that was paid was barely enough to cover my expenses, no thanks to the constant hikes in toll and petrol prices. When members of other professions can be salaried whilst learning, I don’t see why we cannot emulate the same? Sometimes “young” lawyers are deterred from joining the profession because of the quite lengthy pupilage period and the fact that they have financial commitments to fulfill and mouths to feed. Nine months is a long period to go without pay if you ask me.

What would you suggest to overcome this problem?

The best way to overcome this problem is to ensure that pupils are paid a salary and not mere allowances. The amount does not have to be high but it should at least be commensurate with the nature of their work and the place where these pupils work. A chambering pupil in Kuala Lumpur should reasonably be expected to be paid more than a pupil working in Mersing as the cost of living is lower in the latter.

Moving on, a respected scholar Datuk Abu Hassan made a comment about chastity belts for women, and then said he was merely joking.

Well, I am strongly of the view that such remark is totally unwarranted. How is that going to thwart crimes against women? We cannot force every individual to wear the chastity belt. Would the “would-be” rapist know who wears the chastity belt and who does not? They may be frustrated later by the “discovery” of the chastity belt and that could endanger the life of the victim. Who will be at the receiving end of the frustration of the rapist but for the victim herself?

Mishant a/l Thiruchelvam We should stop victimizing the victim. The view advocated by the scholar is self-centered and outright sexist. This issue should be tackled from the root. No victim ought to be blamed for being unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Take the late Nor Suzaily for instance, who was raped and murdered by a bus driver. She was covered from top to bottom in baju kurung but that did not prevent the heinous crime of rape from being committed. Everyone should exercise self-restraint and mutual respect when dealing with the opposite sex.

This view came from a respected and educated Islamic scholar.

It does not matter if it comes from an educated person or any layman from the street. Such remarks are uncalled for and absolutely insensitive. He perceives women as objects or chattels and that is an outright Neanderthal view. How do you compel women to wear the chastity belt? Are we equating our womenfolk to our cars whereby we equip it with the latest handle lock or alarm system to prevent carjacking?

There are moderate voices in Islam today such as the one that came from Perlis Mufti Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin. He is against the idea of belts for women, and he urged all religious figures not to make suggestions that can appear to discriminate women and which make people think the religion as undermining women.

I agree with the view expressed by Sisters in Islam when they said Malaysia is reaching 50 years of independence and we should be proud of the high standards we set for ourselves, and not the double standard set against half of the population. On the contrary, should we then propose that men wear chastity belts because it is their urges that need to be controlled?

The view and comment by Datuk Abu Hassan is cloistered and demeaning. Being a respected scholar, people look to him for his knowledge, wisdom and guidance and by making such a remark, it looks like he is not worth his salt.

On other matters, as you are aware, there was a recent protest against the hike in toll rates.

Like any other member of the public, I feel that the increase in the toll rates is too steep a price to pay and the hike has not been justified by the Government. I do not have facts and figures to support my contention, but from the viewpoint of a mere observer, these highways seem to be doing fairly well. The generally high volume of road users that use the highways on a daily basis should generate handsome revenue for the concessionaires. When these concessionaire agreements were entered into by the relevant parties, the volume of traffic on the highways was not as high as it is currently and the fact is that the volume is bound to increase in the near future. I therefore cannot understand the need for such a hefty increase in the toll rates.

It looks like the Government has made a very hasty decision and has succumbed to pressure by the concessionaires to increase the toll rates. The Government has also shown a lack of transparency on its part by initially electing not to reveal the details of the concessionaire agreements but chose to hide behind the oppressive Official Secrets Act.

The Government should have put more thought into the matter when making such decisions that would have drastic effects. The Government should realize that the majority of the public use these highways to commute because there are no other viable options.

What about public transport?

It is a well-known and documented fact that Malaysia lacks an efficient public transportation system. The majority of public transportation here has been focused in the city centre of Kuala Lumpur where the Monorail, the LRT Light Rail Transit and buses cover nearly every corner of the city. However, the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur and other areas of the Klang Valley have less than mediocre modes of public transport. In some areas the only means of public transport are buses with a schedule of one trip every hour. Hence, on the whole, public transportation is not an alternative for many road users.

Tun Dr. Mahathir recently commented that the concessionaire agreements were not thoroughly scrutinized by the Cabinet.

When I first read that statement in the newspapers I was surprised and bemused. The fact that such a respected figure in our society has come out and said publicly that the Cabinet did not vet the concessionaire agreements thoroughly when it was entered into evidences the lackadaisical attitude of our Government Ministers. The Government was entrusted by the public to act in the best interests of the people. But it looks like the Government has failed miserably. The public at large has to now bear the brunt of the Government’s inadvertence by paying higher toll rates.

Further, the fact that the Government has threatened to use the OSA against Parti KeAdilan’s leaders for exposing the agreements does not augur well with a majority of the public. The Government should have realized that this is a matter of public interest before threatening to use such a draconian piece of legislation against an opposition party which had acted in line with its duty, which as a “check and balance mechanism” of the Government. And to ensure that the Government of the day acts in the best interests of the public. Kudos to KeAdilan for enlightening the public at large as to the contents of such agreements which has caused grave injustice to the people of Malaysia.

I do not understand why the Government has been so reluctant to reveal the details of the agreements and has chosen instead to use an oppressive tool, the OSA to deter anyone from revealing the details of the agreements.

Other YL Personalities: