Closing by Edmund Bon

Delegates and friends,

I see and hear two themes emerging from the discussions in this Convention.

Firstly, fear – fear for ourselves, fear for the profession and fear of the future. This is not unique to our Bar, and is not insurmountable. It is also experienced by young lawyers in other jurisdictions.

The answers are found in the topics discussed at this Convention: enhancing and continuing our professional development, economical and intelligent deployment of tools of technology and finding our niche in the profession. I am sure all of us have discovered some ways to deal with these fears, and have been sufficiently empowered.

Secondly, I see and hear hope. There are many of you who have the ability to develop to become ‘towering young lawyers’, or are already so. Many of you will also nurture into outstanding and respectable lawyers, and future leaders of the Bar who will stand out in this crowded profession. This, I am quite sure.

May I reiterate that the Malaysian Bar is an extremely robust organisation which itself stands out among the various professional organisations in our society. There is definitely a place for anyone who sincerely seeks to be part of the profession, and who is prepared to uphold the Bar’s roles and objects imbued in statute.

Nevertheless, in any organisation, especially one with more than 12,000 members, there will be differences in views and approaches as to that which is best for the Bar. Generally, we have those who are conservative, those who are liberal and those who are ambivalent.

Believing and adhering to well-established principles of free speech and expression, it is no surprise that strong statements are frequently made during our general meetings, on the Bar website and in various public platforms. This is not something we should be troubled by; rather, it is something we should cherish. The struggle will always be to continue our discourses with decorum and respect, and reach our collective decisions based on rational and logical grounds. Sectarian arguments whether based on gender, ethnicity or religion should have little place in the Bar. I am sure that as the Bar now faces the challenge of globalisation and specifically, liberalisation of the profession, it will become evident that we cannot move forward divided.

Last but not least, I am glad that the ‘Statement of the 3rd Young Lawyers Convention’ was today adopted by consensus. It represents your aspirations. It will be tabled before the Bar Council, and I am confident that the proposals will be discussed, and where appropriate, worked on towards fruition. Encouragingly, many of the recommendations made at the 1st Convention in Cherating (2003) and at the 2nd Convention in Pangkor (2005) are already in place. This again highlights the beneficial value of the Convention which is now an entrenched part of the Bar’s historical annals.

We hope to work with many of you in the future. As a start, our ‘YL Personality’ and ‘tete-a-tete’ columns in collaboration with the Bar website requires your contributions in different ways, and we hope you will assist.

We are very glad to see so many of you at this Convention travelling from afar such as Kelantan, Trengganu and Pahang. Further, the participation of lawyers from Penang has been most refreshing.

I am sure all of us have learnt a great deal and together, we will work to continue efforts at progressively reforming ourselves and the Bar.

With this, I officially bring the Convention to a close.

Reflections on the Convention

PENANG, Sun: The 3rd Young Lawyers Convention drew to a strong conclusion with its final session on the morning of 20 January 2008. For the past two days, delegates of this Convention were exposed to numerous topics and issues involving legal education, information technology, work-life balance and activism at the Bar.

In the final session, Desmond Ho who moderated the session, invited delegates to reflect on the Convention. Most of them who expressed their views emphasised the need for young lawyers to “stand out in the crowd”. Damian Yeo of the Malacca Bar stressed that a young lawyer needs to achieve excellence in order to stand out in the crowd. To do so, one must be competent in the area of law that he or she is practising in.

Khaizan Shahrizat of the Kuala Lumpur Bar echoed similar sentiments when she asserted that “standing out” is a matter of choice and the young lawyers need to live up to the expectations of their clients and the profession.

After some time discussing the issues raised in the Convention, the delegates moved on to formulate concrete plans of action and steps to be taken after the Convention. Edmund Bon pointed out that in the previous Conventions in Cherating (2003) and Pangkor (2005), participants had made statements in support of reforms aimed at advancing the objectives of the Bar. It was beneficial as a good guide for assessment, and many of the proposals made previously have been met.

Dipendra Harshad Rai with the assistance of two speakers in the final session namely Noor Arianti Osman and Dara Waheda Mohd Rufin then discussed tentative points to be included in the draft “Statement of the 3rd National Young Lawyers Convention 2008”.

Delegates deliberated, discussed and made suggestions. Numerous views were taken from the floor.

Finally, a Statement was finalised which reflected the collective aspirations of the delegates.

The Statement called for the following, among others:

• That all members of the Bar and pupils-in-chambers strongly support and encourage the existence and/or re-activation of the Young Lawyers Committees (“YLCs”) of the State Bars.

• That YLCs at all State Bars continue to exist and if abolished, to be re-activated immediately, and the NYLC continues to exist consistent with the Bar Council’s decision of 2 December 2006.

• That the Bar Council carries out and does all that is necessary to ensure that YLCs continue to be a mandatory committee in every State Bar.

• That the following plan of activities be strongly recommended, encouraged and actively pursued by the respective YLCs of the State Bars:

(a) To continue to represent the views and promote the interests of the young lawyers in relation to issues of practice, areas of concern and rights at the Bar.

(b) To carry out appropriate community projects to assist the less privileged members of society.

(c) To support, defend and/or take up human rights issues domestically and internationally.

(d) To actively support legal aid and legal aid centres all over Malaysia.

(e) To organise and/or participate in Bar-led sporting, social and recreational events.

(f) To continue engaging and building close relationships with all institutions of higher learning and Government agencies/ministries.

(g) To build, network and maintain a working relationship with other professional bodies and civil society organisations.

• That the Bar Council, State Bar Committees, law firms and all lawyers take all necessary steps to address the issues identified in the Working Conditions Survey Report dated 26 October 2007.

In the NYLC chief’s Closing Address, Edmund Bon pointed out that despite all the fears and obstacles faced by the young lawyers in the light of impending globalisation, he sees a lot of hope among the delegates and young lawyers. He is confident that young lawyers will be “towering young lawyers” and respectable members of the profession. Many young lawyers will also be future leaders of the Bar. Further, it was emphasised that despite divergent views within the Bar, “it will become evident that we cannot move forward as a divided Bar”. He then closed the Convention.

Essentially, this Convention was a rallying call to all young lawyers to take ownership and responsibility for their roles as members of the Malaysian Bar. Will the young lawyers now answer this call to make a difference? This Convention may have ended, but the journey and struggle continues, refreshed.

Statement at the Convention

Tuesday, 22 January 2008 07:09pm

STATEMENT OF THE 3RD NATIONAL YOUNG LAWYERS CONVENTION 2008 WHEREAS civil and democratic societies recognise the need for a competent, independent and impartial body of legally trained persons to promote and secure the administration of justice, provide legal services and uphold the rule of law and the Federal Constitution; RECOGNISING that young lawyers and pupils are the future of the Malaysian Bar and have the potential to be a powerful force in the administration of justice without fear or favour; RECOGNISING that the National Young Lawyers Committee (“NYLC”) and the respective State Bar Young Lawyers Committees are appropriate platforms to promote, manage and assist in the development of young lawyers; RECOGNISING that the landscape for the mode of communication has changed in light of the developments in information technology and in recognition of the need to communicate with all members of the Malaysian Bar on a regular basis; REAFFIRMING the Plan of Action and Vision known as the ‘Selesa Conclusions’ adopted on 11 June 2006 at Selesa Hills Homes, Bentung which states as follows, among others: a. We reaffirm that the NYLC aims to represent, protect and promote the interests of young lawyers of the Bar and to empower them to contribute to social good. b. We recognise the following as the core aspirations of the NYLC: (i) To profile the NYLC as a platform for young lawyers to voice their views and concerns on issues affecting the Bar such as the administration of the Bar and professional practice, and on issues of public interest such as the administration of and access to justice, and law reform. (ii) To maintain and nurture good working relationships with other Bar Council committees, various governmental agencies, NGOs, other organisations and the media, and to work together with these committees, agencies and organisations in rallying issues of concern affecting young lawyers and society in general. (iii) To establish and/or re-activate Young Lawyers Committees at State levels and to provide opportunities for the effective networking and exchange of information, ideas and opinions among young lawyers of different states. (iv) To collate and study data pertaining to the demographics of practice and working conditions of young lawyers, and to engage employers, the Bar Council and other stakeholders in constructive dialogue with the intention of creating a better and wholesome working environment for young lawyers. (v) To assist the education and enhance the development of young lawyers in maximising their potential in terms of producing quality legal work, achieving a balanced and fulfilling career, and contributing to the Bar and social good. TAKING NOTE of the NYLC’s Working Conditions Survey Report dated 26 October 2007; WE CALL FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1. That all members of the Bar and pupils-in-chambers strongly support and encourage the existence and/or re-activation of the Young Lawyers Committees (“YLCs”) of the State Bars. 2. That YLCs at all State Bars continue to exist and if abolished, to be re-activated immediately, and the NYLC continues to exist consistent with the Bar Council’s decision of 2 December 2006. 3. That the Bar Council carries out and does all that is necessary to ensure that YLCs continue to be a mandatory committee in every State Bar. 4. That the following plan of activities be strongly recommended, encouraged and actively pursued by the respective YLCs of the State Bars: (a) To continue to represent the views and promote the interests of the young lawyers in relation to issues of practice, areas of concern and rights at the Bar. (b) To carry out appropriate community projects to assist the less privileged members of society. (c) To support, defend and/or take up human rights issues domestically and internationally. (d) To actively support legal aid and legal aid centres all over Malaysia. (e) To organise and/or participate in Bar-led sporting, social and recreational events. (f) To continue engaging and building close relationships with all institutions of higher learning and Government agencies/ministries. (g) To build, network and maintain a working relationship with other professional bodies and civil society organisations. 5. That the training and development of young lawyers be organised internally by the Bar, and be encouraged and embraced. 6. That the Bar Council, State Bar Committees, law firms and all lawyers take all necessary steps to be electronically connected and have access to the Malaysian Bar website which includes undertaking programmes to create and enhance awareness among members of the Bar on issues relating to information technology. 7. That the Bar Council, State Bar Committees, law firms and all lawyers take all necessary steps to address the issues identified in the Working Conditions Survey Report dated 26 October 2007. 8. That the NYLC and YLCs of the State Bars engage and negotiate with employers on the issues identified in the Working Conditions Survey Report dated 26 October 2007. Dated this 20th day of January 2008 Resolved at the 3rd Young Lawyers Convention 2008, Penang

Mighty IT-Empowerment or Enslavement

NYLC Convention: Mighty IT – Empowerment or Enslavement?

Contributed by Simranjit Kaur Gill

Sunday, 20 January 2008 07:54am

Lim Chee Wee, one of the panellists. PENANG, Sat: Kesian! That was the sentiment of the young lawyers from the East Coast, Ipoh and Seremban as the young lawyers from KL lawyers grappled with issues on whether IT empowered or enslaved them. “Some of our clients are illiterate… They don’t use IT”, commented Hema, delegate from the Perak Bar and “… some lawyers don’t even have e-mail”, responded Rizal, delegate from Kelantan. Rizal also added that “we don’t work long hours” to comments by KL young lawyers that they had to instantaneously attend to client’s/partner’s demands at all hours – even at 11pm and even on their day off. So, is the issue of IT only limited to the lawyers from KL? Perhaps for now, yes, responded panellist, Lim Chee Wee, but with the changing landscape of technology, even the illiterate client would inevitably have an educated and IT savvy child. The impact of IT would therefore eventually trickle down to all parts of Malaysia and lawyers have to be prepared to face this. At the 3rd Young Lawyer’s Convention 2008, session 3 on ‘IT: How does it make us mighty?’ panellists and participants discussed the impact of IT on the daily lives of lawyers. On the one hand, information was at a lawyer’s finger-tips; communication and interaction with clients and colleagues improved; and research abilities widened through countless on-line legal research engines. However, IT has blurred the divide between work and personal life commented panellist, Brendan Navin Siva. KL lawyers are expected to attend to client’s queries late into the night; they have to be ‘on-call’ 24/7 but are yet expected to work within the traditional work regime and mind-set, namely they still have to clock in by 9am. He added that though the working environment had progressively changed, the legal profession has not adapted or changed the way other industries have. For example, corporate organisations have already responded to this changing climate by providing their employees with flexible working schemes. Employees who have worked tirelessly over the weekend to finish a project are automatically given 2 days off to rest. As a result, the legal profession has lost its talented lawyers who want flexible working schemes to industries that have adapted and responded. Chee Wee agreed that flexible working hours are being sought by employees. He quoted the example of working women. The number of women in the legal work-force has increased tremendously. “50% of the lawyers and partners in my firm are women. “The truth of the matter is that we have no choice but to change if we want to retain our talent”, said Chee Wee. He however added that ‘trust’ was an essential element in an employer’s decision whether to grant an employee flexible working hours or to work from home. If the employer places their trust in an employee then such trust should be reciprocated with proper performance by the employee. At this point, the moderator Gavin Tang interjected that the blurring between work and personal life goes both ways – employees do also spend time in the office “working” on personal matters like MSN Chat and Facebook. So, are employers today prepared to put in place flexible working hours, queried Chair of the NYLC Committee, Edmund Bon? And how is the Bar Council reacting to these issues? As employers, it appears that none of the panellists had yet to put in place flexible working schemes for employees though they recognised the serious need for it. Chee Wee commented that the Bar Council can play the role of highlighting the future impact of IT to the legal profession but at the end of the day, it is up to each firm to decide when and how they react. When it came to the blurring of work and personal life, panelist, Nizam Bashir, argued that it is up to the individual lawyers to set their boundaries. Young lawyers have to learn how to say to their employers, “No – I can’t give the quality of work you want in the short response time set”. Nizam also queried that perhaps IT was not the issue but rather whether law firms were taking on more work than they could handle. “Perhaps, such firms should revamp the way in which the firm takes in work?”, added Nizam. At the end of the day, the panellists and most of the participants agreed that the extent of the impact of IT depends on each individual lawyer’s perspective. Lawyers can either utilise IT to their advantage or allow it to intrude into their personal life. It is up to a lawyer to exploit the vast potential benefits but not lose control of their own lives. It is essentially a question of whether a lawyer allows IT to empower or enslave them.

Special Luncheon Talk by Lim Kean Chye

Saturday, 19 January 2008 11:51pm

Contributed by Sunil Lopez and Lai Chee Hoe PENANG, Sat: After the second session of the day, the young delegates to the 3rd Young Lawyers Convention made their way to the coffee house at the Bayview Georgetown for a spot of lunch. Most delegates would have walked into the coffeehouse and headed straight for the buffet table to satiate their growling tummies and most would have walked past an elderly gentleman and his wife sitting amongst other young lawyers who had gathered around this unassuming couple. As lunch progressed, Dipendra Harshad Rai stood up and announced that there was a surprise guest amongst us. After an elaborate introduction, he revealed the name of this surprise guest who was none other than the famed lawyer and freedom fighter, Lim Kean Chye. Lim was called to the Singapore Bar in 1950, and the Malayan Bar in 1961. He comes from an illustrious family which includes Dato’ PG Lim and the late Lim Kean Siew, and was a fearless advocate. In the year 2000, he disliked the way a Judge treated two young lawyers, and from then on decided to quit practice. Lim spoke, as expected, with the easy confidence of a man who had seen much in his 88 years as boy and man. The tales of his life include surviving a German U-boat attack during World War II and the struggle for independence from the British. For someone who had himself been through much hardship, he expressed genuine appreciation of the dedication of lawyers today who struggle for a better Malaysia. He is encouraged with the renewed interest of the Bar in advancing the causes of human rights, and acknowledged the efforts of the lawyers seeking to collectively shape the future of our country. On that note, he also believes that the young lawyers should continue to be active towards nation-building initiatives. Nevertheless, he reminded us that there is much to be done in upholding the rights of Malaysians in this day. Lim was a founder member of the Malayan Democratic Union (“MDU”), which was formed on 21 December 1945. MDU was a political organisation which consisted of English educated Malaysians whose main objective was the assertion of the right to self-governance. He was not liked by the British, “to them I was a scum”. During the question and answer session, Lim, who lived under the leadership of 5 Prime Ministers in Malaysia, answered that they were similar to the leaders today: “I think they are the same. They still hold on to the principle of UMNO supremacy. The only difference was that the late Tunku Abdul Rahman dies in poverty.” Lim also explained that it was his mother who motivated him to do the things he did: “She was caring for the sick, poor and needy. She was a very generous person and probably influenced him”. It was heartening to listen to a man who had fought the good fight in his day for a free Malaysia. Lim’s stories about courage and perseverance in the face of the iron rule of the British Empire in the then Malaya echo today in present day Malaysia where a different struggle rages on for political and societal change. The tales of his struggles that Lim so willingly shared with budding lawyers during what would normally have been an ordinary lunch proved to be most humbling, refreshing and inspirational. In appreciation, he received a hearty applause and a ‘Walk For Justice’ t-shirt and cap, which he received with caution, remarking that wearing the t-shirt might lead to his arrest.

Standing Out in A Crowded Profession

PENANG, Sat: “Exploit your talents, be passionate, empower yourself with knowledge and get involved!” was the resounding voice of the panellists sharing their views today on the fourth session on Standing Out in A Crowded Profession, second day of the 3rd Young Lawyers Convention 2008 held here at the Bayview Hotel, Georgetown.

Moderator Noreen Ahmad Ariff led the panellists Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, Dr. Azmi Sharom and Richard Wee Thiam Seng in a bi-lingual interactive forum addressing this much awaited topic, which invited 160 odd delegates of the Convention to speak their minds.

The first speaker, lecturer and columnist of The Star’s “A Brave New World” Dr. Azmi Sharom shared his views on what he expects of law students who entered the legal profession today, amongst others being courageous by first standing out for themselves, since the legal practice has evolved into a more open and critical environment.

Kuala Lumpur legal activist Richard Wee, in his usual candid manner began by wearing the sunglasses (and looking silly on purpose) in trying to make a point that nowadays, young lawyers seem to think that to stand out, all you need to do is dress differently and drive a BMW.

Richard quipped that a young lawyer should when entering practice not have such wrong perceptions of success by emulating the ‘kiasu’ attitude (a situation of A versus B, where A must always win). He was regretful that some young lawyers tend to put materialism before legal ability and felt strongly that if a young lawyer was sufficiently intelligent they would stand out, going on to give an example of how the Young Lawyers Committee was a good platform for a young lawyer to stand out.

In response to Noreen’s question on whether Bar activism is necessary in order to stand out in the Bar, Richard Wee replied that one should only get involved if they genuinely portrayed an interest in the Bar. If you want to represent someone, you have to be genuine about it. Young Lawyers can be outstanding by taking part in activities organised for them, including social and charity work, legal and human rights activism. Richard pointed out that this did not mean that you had to participate in controversial demonstrations but legal activism also meant standing out for your client and their rights as individuals, be it as a criminal defence advocate or a conveyancing practitioner.

He noted that the Malaysian Bar was in a unique position of being able to deal with specific situations affecting the legal rights of the community as a whole. However, in order to do so, the Bar must be strong and be empowered by strong and outstanding individuals. This can only be continually achieved if young lawyers are willing to participate in its activities, to work towards improving the world around them.

At this point, Dr Azmi interjected that to be outstanding in any career, it must be seen as a career. One must make sure one is doing what one wants to do, and be doing it for right reasons. If one loves and has a passion for what they are doing, that work will never be tiring.

Our moderator Noreen then posed this question to Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, a newly called young lawyer who was already passionately involved in Bar Activities, “Passion sometimes dies. How do you keep it alive?”

In reply, Fadiah described legal practice to be more than just work, it was a continual responsibility to serve the people. She invited the delegates to see that what is happening around them will eventually effect them; they cannot live in isolation. A lawyer cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the plight of less fortunate people who have no access to legal services, because it is also their inherent responsibility to protect the public on legal issues. To Fadiah’s view, taking part in activities is not about fame and glamour. It involved llots of hard work. One becomes humbled by the people one meets. Standing out in the legal profession for her meant finding a way to materialise what you believe in. To answer Noreen’s query on how confidence could be developed, Fadiah replied that this is a constant, current and real issue whether you are a lawyer, doctor, architect or engineer. It was about doing a job well without sacrificing peoples’ trust.

Richard Wee’s take on the situation was that confidence can be built with experience. This is complimented by an attitude of being honest with oneself. The situation faced by young lawyers today is a common problem faced by all young people entering the employment market. As things evolve around you, experience will allow you to draw clear goals and aspirations and cultivating a better work ethic.

Lee Shih, a young lawyer from the Kuala Lumpur Bar, as participating member of the audience gave his viewpoint that contributing articles to law magazines, giving talks, writing law books, volunteering your time is a way for a young lawyer to publicise oneself. For example, he pointed out that he knew of a sole proprietor who raised public awareness of his legal services by writing on legal issues on his blog. Lee Shih noted that this had the effect of successfully showcasing the issues the lawyer was passionate about, their views on the matter and their area of specialization. To follow up on this, Richard Wee expressed his view that writing was crucial to anything on this earth. Knowledge is available today for everyone’s use is possible because someone in the past has written about it. Writing about what you know allows other people to share it.

The audience was then fortunate enough to share the experiences of other young lawyers who had already managed to stand out from the rest, including Dipendra Harshard Rai, Amer Hamzah and Edmund Bon.

Dipendra said that not all young lawyers were interested in taking part in lawyers committee, but they all want to be successful! Dipendra felt that to lead a successful life in current times, you must think out of the box. The same type of practice twenty years ago may not be the same suitable for you. He invited a discussion on how can a brave young lawyer could reinvent the profession, by improving on the knowledge given to him by the seniors.

Criminal advocate Amer Hamzah said that before you can stand out you must first stand up! Make a change to yourself. It was essential that young lawyers have the independent attitude or mentality, and not depend on someone else if they wanted to be outstanding and make it on their own. He did it by taking up legal aid files, despite lack of experience at the beginning, whilst still seeking guidance by senior lawyers. Over the years, one must gradually gain experience, invest in yourself by purchase books and attending courses, read articles and cases. A change of mindset was required to change oneself, followed by an empowerment by gaining information.

Current National Young Lawyers Committee chairman, Edmund Bon said the most important thing is when you make a promise, you must carry out the promise. If you fail to carry out a promise for more than once, your word will fail to hold credence. Secondly, his message to the young lawyers not to fear Bar activities. Just because the Bar organised events which touched a political view, that did not make them supporters or opposers of any particular political parties. He expressed his pride in the Malaysian Bar who strived to make a difference and improve the situation not just for its members and also the nation.

In response to the question posed by participant Sandesh Kabir, another delegate Rizalman felt that seniority was a factor. Rizalman who practises in Kota Bahru felt that one must slowly be involved with legal events to enable them gain that experience required for later years.

As a National Young Lawyer’s Committee member this writer addressed the floor by expressing her view that age was not a factor, since an individual could stand out by taking advantage of their own abilities, which each person young or senior would possess. If you can write: write; if you can organize events, get involved in law activities which would inevitably allow you to get involved in organising events. For her, being involved in young lawyers committees enables you to mingle with people of various experiences, gaining the confidence to stand out faster. This writer then shared a piece of advice given to her by Malaysian Bar Past President, Hj Sulaiman Abdullah. When voicing her concerns that she felt resistance to her views from the more senior members of a committee she participated in as a young lawyer, he was conversely very encouraging. Hj Sulaiman had pointed out that when she voiced a clearly dissenting point of view, even if it were not accepted, at the very least the other members of that community be given a different perspective to their considerations.

Pupil Ken You of Kuala Lumpur then posed a view that standing out meant being successful. In reply, Fadiah said that what people thought about you cannot be made the most important consideration. When one believes in something, you must fight for what is right and you will stand out based on that. Then Farah, a young lawyer from Kuala Lumpur, shared her view that if one is sincere in ones’ job, it will reward you in return. If you only do it for the money, it will only remain a job forever. Haizan also from Kuala Lumpur shared her views that the wishes of a lawyer is not necessarily measured by big cases, big cars, but more on whether we are responsible for our work.

Richard Wee qualified his earlier statements that when he encouraged young lawyers to participate, it did not mean that he was asking them to participate in chaotic revolution. There were many means to convey your thoughts, and one must use any legal means necessary especially if the system was failing them. On the issue of young lawyers, Richard felt that a tool of success was actually your own personal attitude, at the end of the day, and his encouragement was merely to invite the delegates of the convention to energise people around you once they left the event. Because of a fine causal link, by merely adopting good proper practice a young lawyer could assist in lessening insurance premium for the whole of the profession in the long run. He pointed out that lawyers work in a symbiosis, needing each other. One person who does a blunder in his work will cause another to pay for their mistake.

On Edmund Bon’s invitation, the talk went slightly off tangent when pupil Azmi from Kuala Lumpur, expressed his dissenting voice talking about the Bar Council’s Walk for Justice held in September 2007, which he felt was pointless, not the right method and merely became a show of desperation on part of lawyers. After much uproar caused by this statement, Tina and Amer pointed out that the voices of young lawyers like Azmi, though unacceptable to some, was necessary for the appreciation of the issue as a whole.

In conclusion, the panellists wholeheartedly encouraged the delegates present to begin standing out by firstly standing up for oneself and having the courage to stand for issues they felt passionate about since a reputation would shortly follow suit.

Continuing Professional Development

Saturday, 19 January 2008 06:33pm

PENANG, Sat: It is said that the standards of the Bar have dropped. Alarmingly, some added. Such a statement, by itself and fortified by the looming threat of globalisation and the advent of the trans-boundary free market for legal service, raised a high degree of concern. The National Young Lawyers Committee saw the 3rd Young Lawyers Convention, with over 150 young lawyers from all over the country in attendance, as a platform well-suited to discuss the issue in depth, to find out where and how it went wrong and the approach for its betterment. Steven Thiruneelakandan set a serious tone to this serious issue when he brought the delegates back to the proposal for lawyers to accumulate a minimum 20 points over a two year period which has yet to be sanctioned by the Bar. He proposed a centralised mandatory scheme which may be followed for continuing professional development, presenting the list of subjects, the record sheet, the method for points collection and the blueprints to be followed to realise this effort. He further showed the delegates the list of countries all over the world where continuing professional development is made mandatory. Colin Andrew Pereira, who was the chair of Kuala Lumpur Bar Continuing Legal Education Committee, explained to the delegates the approach and areas that have been addressed by KL Bar since five years ago to promote continuing legal education, which include the mandatory pupil’s program, fundamentals of practice, specialised areas and workshops. He raised the issue that a centralised mandatory scheme may not cater for the needs of lawyers in other states and the State Bars which is why currently the State Bars are allowed create their own continuing legal education programs. The hype of the session was when Dr Azmi Sharom from University Malaya took the rostrum. As an educator, he acknowledged the common public concern over the questionable standards of legal education in the local universities. He stunned the audience for a short moment when he said it all boils down to “politik tak senonoh”, being the lack of political will to deter from interfering with the education system in the country as he later explained. He received a loud applaud and approving grins form the floor of these young lawyers for this audacious remark. The plan to introduce the Common Bar Exam has its shortcomings, he said. For one, he pointed out, the lecturers will lose control over the integrity of the examinations, bringing the delegates back to the infamous CLP episode back in 2001. We have such a track record with Legal Qualifying Board, which is now the body governing the only common examination for the legal profession. While he agreed that vocational programmes are important to raise the standards of the Bar, L.L.B. must remain academic because the practical law cannot improve without the theories and philosophies of law being studied and debated by the academicians. What we need, he added, is a working relationship between the Bar and the universities where, instead of just reproving the quality of the students produced by the local universities, the Bar provides feedback on what is expected from the law graduates. The universities, on the other hand can provide the legal industry with the cutting edge, what could be important in the future. Amer Hamzah Arshad, the moderator for this session posed the rather cliché question to the speakers, that whether it is true that overseas graduates make better lawyers than local graduates. To this question, the speakers were in an agreement that this is not the measure to determine a good lawyer. Dr Azmi added that the difference between overseas graduates and local graduates is mainly on the level of exposure to the way of life of people in other countries which the overseas graduates acquire during their stint in the foreign university, and that kind of experience helped to broaden their scope of mind and perspectives toward things. This Session 2 saw a more encouraging participation from the young lawyers. A chambering student questioned the marking system of the Professional Ethics Test, to which Steven and Colin explained that the Bar is keeping track of the standards of the test, reading out the statistics of the test and that the Bar does provide sessions with the pupils to explain to them why they have failed the test. Amer concluded the session by suggesting the young lawyers to read a book entitled “Letters to a Young Lawyer”, written by Alan M. Dershowits.