Guess who literally walked into me at the Himpunan Rakyat KL112?
Yup, none other than the honourable president of the Malaysian Bar, Lim Chee Wee.
I had seen him walking in my direction, but he had not noticed me until he near literally walked into me and blurted, “Oh God, the last person I wanted to see”.
I thought nothing of it then, and like the many others who had heard him, I laughed it off.
Some 3 weeks later, a letter from the Advocates & Solicitors Disciplinary Board to me dated 17th January, 2013 got me wondering if there was more to that retort.
The letter had been delivered some time in January, but as I had been traveling, I only got to read its contents some time in the first week of February.
The letter refers to Complaint number : DB/12/8045 and credits me as the complainant.
In the very first sentence of that letter, I am referred to my letter dated 17th December, 2012 “forwarded by the Bar Council on 21 December, 2012”.
To refresh your memory, my letter of 17th December was that letter by which I laid before the Bar Council the matter of who was the scumbag lawyer who drew up the second statutory declaration signed by P I Bala with a view to withdrawing serious allegations against Najib in his earlier statutory declaration, and alluded to by me in an earlier post.
Note that my letter was delivered by the Bar Council to the Disciplinary Board on 21st December.
The day after the Bar Council received my letter, Chee Wee issued a statement.
FMT quoted him as saying that ‘the most important person in a complaint against a legal practitioner should be the victim himself’.
“Who is the victim here? Has the victim Balasubramaniam raised concerns about anything at this point? We need more facts, either from the victim or somebody else. People must come forward with the facts. I’m not going on a fishing expedition… knocking on people’s office or doors for facts. This is not a case of clients money disappearing” , Chee Wee is reported to have said.
Now, Chee Wee being clearly aware that P I Bala is the victim in this whole sordid business, what was the purpose of sending my letter to the Disciplinary Board?
Enclosed with the letter from the Disciplinary Board was a stack of documents and instructions for me to comply with so that my complaint might be ‘processed’.
The standard form complaint sent to me bore several questions that I was required to give responses to, duly affirmed before a commissioner of oaths.
This is question 2.4 : When did you appoint this advocate and solicitor?
Question 2.5 : What were your instructions to this advocate and solicitor?
If Chee Wee has taken a little trouble to appraise himself of the facts already infamously known by the public at large, he must surely realise that even the ‘victim’ Bala would not be able to answer these two questions!
And if the ‘victim’ can offer no answer to these questions, what responses does the Bar Council or the Disciplinary Board expect from me?
Forgive me, but is the Bar Council just plain stupid, or is there more to this exercise in futility than meets the eye?
Thanks to 14 young and brave lawyers, though, we may yet get at the truth.
This Saturday, 16th March, the Bar will hold its AGM.
Malaysiakini reports that these 14 lawyers have presented a motion to be deliberated at the AGM to “establish an Independent Investigation Committee to urgently enquire into the facts and circumstances relating to the preparation and execution” of that now infamous SD2.
In their motion, these young lawyers took the Bar Council to task for, amongst other things, permitting “itself to be viewed as being reluctant to act decisively on the matter”.
14 young lawyers have shown themselves to be true to the very first and paramount purpose of the Malaysian Bar : : to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interests or that of its members, uninfluenced by fear or favour.
We shall know by this Saturday if there are anymore such as these 14 at the Bar.
C. Alfred
March 12, 2013
You are a true blue human rights activist who does not mince with words. If only Malaysia can have more people like you who is fearless and upright this country would not be in the state it is. Keep it up Haris and I am impressed with your sheer determination, guts and grit for taking the Bar Council to task for not upholding justice without fear or favour. May God bless you
May God have mercy on us all and spare this nation from anymore morons and the morally corrupt from helming our institutions of state.
Disgusted
March 12, 2013
This Lim Chee Wee must be related to Koh Tsu Koon or belong to the same clan of Eunuchs.
bigjoe99
March 12, 2013
I was literally crapping when Lim Chee Wee issued his first statement. I mean Ambiga sat at that job he has now. The species could not be any different.
The Bar Council is NOT the Malaysian judiciary, NOT just the victims can initiate action and the Bar Council role is to act against and for its members. In Hong Kong or Singapore, Any lawyer can even get the Justice Dept, not just their Bar Association to act with enough evidence EVEN against a CHIEF JUDGE OR THE AG.
The fact you and the 14 young lawyers have not asked for Lim Chee Wee to be impeached is already giving him face to him and to the Bar Council
Work At Home Dad
March 12, 2013
You know… it’s easy for us to talk. Not siding with LCW, but definitely not everyone got “b*lls of steel” like Bro Harris. Read the post on “Project IC” : https://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/project-ic/ and just imagine… could be LCW is one of the “lucky ones” to have a similar file on him?
Marge
March 12, 2013
Bless you Haris!
Bless you too
Another Anak Bangsa Malaysia
March 12, 2013
Haris,
My understanding is that after this Saturday, Mr Lim Chee Wee’s seeming lack of action as President of the Bar Council will be moot as a new President is taking over.
Having said that and given LCW’s normally feisty demeanour, I have wondered about his apparent disinterest in prosecuting this matter in a more vigorous manner.
Methinks there is more to this than meets the eye.
abdullah37
March 12, 2013
All along I had high regards of this man called Lim Chee Wee but not anymore since it is now proven that he is also a ‘Tai Chi’ master.If he does not have the guts to corner that despicable serpentine lawyer who drew the false SD2 Lim Chee Wee should have the honesty to step down and resign from the Bar Council. He is not only tainting himself but is doing great injustice to all law abiding Malaysians.
Taipan
March 12, 2013
The honorable President was looking for answers for which he could not handle the truth!
wandererAUS
March 13, 2013
Are’nt they all the same?…when the “real thing” is required they run off like blooming eunuchs!!!
OMG, what a wonderful Malaysia we live in.
Vaseau
March 13, 2013
Going by what has happened, it appears that the Bar Council is infested with the kind self-serving parasites normally found in third rate political parties and other shady organizations. The positions they occupy in the Council are only a means to an end …an end which has nothing to do with enabling justice in any shape or form. They subscribe to Najib’s ‘you help me, I help you’ mantra …a mantra that has opened several doors to money-making opportunities …and titles. By omission and / or commission, these parasites are responsible for the various injustices that have come to light.
shakuntala
March 13, 2013
Would the Bar, the whole Bar not take umbrage, other than just 14 young brisk lawyers…..and moan loudly in total, for the loss of its good and honourable name, first and foremost because it is the Guardian of Justice in this country and cannot afford to go wrong..
The Bar should regain its value and respect amongst the Rakyat. They are indisputeably law makers and not allow themselves to be known as destroyers of the unalterable Law.
annabrella
March 15, 2013
I agree. Those in the Bar Council have a lot to answer for as far as I am concerned for the Bar Council is in fact the guardian of Justice in Malaysia and so must be the legal policeman who acts to enforce best practice in the Rule of Law in their jurisdiction.
They do not make Law however, as that is a task allocated for the People’s elected representatives to the legislative chambers of their Parliament.
So first of all, the Bar Council leadership (if there is any that is) has to convince me, and perhaps others too, that they are not, for all intents and purposes, serving the small bar council for the self-service of alcoholic beverages and other there such material perky-stuff but are actually the Bar Council of Malaysia a respected body that has accountability and responsibility for auditing and policing stewardship of the Law they serve and act as guardians of.
“Imagine Power To The People” John Lennon.
rajraman666
March 16, 2013
You are in the Bar council watch Dog as Human Rights Lawyer and by know you already know how Bar Council works on selected piece meals.Now the case will be close forever because PI Bala have return to GOD calls.Bar council like Police, they quickly take action on members who have no Political Connection or $$$.
rajraman. May PI Bala rest in piece.You return to seek justice but justice in Malaysia already dead before you.
annabrella
March 17, 2013
I don’t want to teach any lawyers there in the joint profession (of solicitors and barristers) to suck any legal eggs but the following expectations may help others to understand the sorts of strict responsibilities and standards of quality that are expected as the norm from those who have the privilege of holding themselves out to the general public as being professionally qualified card-carrying members of the esteemed legal profession.
I have used the UK Bar Council Code as an illustrative example but I guess Malaysia’s Bar Council must also have something similar in practice, either in letter and/or in spirit, or perhaps as only another pointless abstractional exercise in words only and not deeds.
The Code of Conduct of the UK Bar Council
The Code of Conduct contains 11 parts. These are accessible from the links below.
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/regulatory-requirements/the-code-of-conduct/
Barristers may wish to note that the Bar Council operates an Ethical Helpline to assist its members with enquiries about the Code of Conduct. Please note, the Bar Standards Board (as the independent regulator) has responsibility for determining whether breaches of the Code have occurred, and in reaching this decision it will not be bound by advice given by the Bar Council or its Ethical Helpline. It remains each barrister’s responsibility to ensure he or she complies with the Code of Conduct.
Bar Standards Board – What we do
We regulate barristers called to the Bar in England and Wales in the public interest.
We are responsible for:
1. Setting the education and training requirements for becoming a barrister;
2. Setting continuing training requirements to ensure that barristers’ skills are maintained throughout their careers;
3. Setting standards of conduct for barristers;
4. Monitoring the service provided by barristers to assure quality;
5. Handling complaints against barristers and taking disciplinary or other action where appropriate.
Our mission
To be recognised as promoting and safeguarding the highest standards of legal education and practice in the interests of clients, the public and the profession.
General purpose of the Code
104. The general purpose of this Code is to provide the requirements for practice as a barrister and the rules and standards of conduct applicable to barristers which are appropriate in the interests of justice and in particular:
(a) in relation to self-employed barristers to provide common and enforceable rules and standards which require them:
(i) to be completely independent in conduct and in professional standing as sole practitioners;
(ii) to act only as consultants instructed by solicitors and other approved persons (save where instructions can be properly dispensed with);
(iii) to acknowledge a public obligation based on the paramount need for access to justice to act for any client in cases within their field of practice;
(b) to make appropriate provision for:
(i) barrister managers, employees and owners of Authorised Bodies; and
(ii) employed barristers taking into account the fact that such barristers are employed to provide legal services to or on behalf of their employer.
Application of the Code
105. A barrister must comply with this Code which (save as otherwise provided) applies to all barristers whenever called to the Bar.
106. Subject to the International Practice Rules (reproduced in Annex A) this Code applies to International work and whether a barrister is practising in England and Wales or elsewhere.
107. A registered European lawyer must comply with this Code in the manner provided for by the Registered European Lawyers Rules (reproduced in Annex B).
Waiver of the Code
108. The Bar Standards Board shall have the power to waive the duty imposed on a barrister to comply with the provisions of this Code in such circumstances and to such extent as the Bar Standards Board may think fit and either conditionally or unconditionally.
Applicable to all barristers:
301. A barrister must have regard to paragraph 104 and must not:
(a) engage in conduct whether in pursuit of his profession or otherwise which is:
(i) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister;
(ii) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or
(iii) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute;
(b) engage directly or indirectly in any occupation if his association with that occupation may adversely affect the reputation of the Bar or in the case of a practising barrister prejudice his ability to attend properly to his practice.
Applicable to practising barristers:
302. A barrister has an overriding duty to the Court to act with independence in the interests of justice: he must assist the Court in the administration of justice and must not deceive or knowingly or recklessly mislead the Court.
303. A barrister:
(a) must promote and protect fearlessly and by all proper and lawful means the lay client’s best interests and do so without regard to his own interests or to any consequences to himself or to any other person (including any colleague, professional client or other intermediary or another barrister, the barrister’s employer or any Authorised Body of which the barrister may be an owner or manager);
(b) owes his primary duty as between the lay client and any other person to the lay client and must not permit any other person to limit his discretion as to how the interests of the lay client can best be served;
(c) when supplying legal services funded by the Legal Services Commission as part of the Community Legal Service or the Criminal Defence Service owes his primary duty to the lay client subject only to compliance with paragraph 304.
304. A barrister who supplies legal services funded by the Legal Services Commission as part of the Community Legal Service or the Criminal Defence Service must in connection with the supply of such services comply with any duty imposed on him by or under the Access to Justice Act 1999 or any regulations or code in effect under that Act and in particular with the duties set out in Annex E.
305.1. A barrister must not, in his professional practice, discriminate unlawfully against, victimise or harass any other person on the grounds of race, colour, ethnic or national origin, nationality, citizenship, sex, gender re-assignment, sexual orientation, marital or civil partnership status, disability, age, religion or belief or pregnancy and maternity.
305.2. Deleted from 1st October 2005.
306. A barrister is individually and personally responsible for his own conduct and for his professional work: he must exercise his own personal judgement in all his professional activities.
307. A barrister must not:
(a) permit his absolute independence integrity and freedom from external pressures to be compromised;
(b) do anything (for example accept a present) in such circumstances as may lead to any inference that his independence may be compromised;
(c) compromise his professional standards in order to please his client the Court or a third party, including any mediator;
(d) give a commission or present (save for small promotional items) or lend any money for any professional purpose to or (save as a remuneration in accordance with the provisions of this Code) accept any money by way of loan or otherwise from any client or any person entitled to instruct him as an intermediary;
(e) make any payment (other than a payment for advertising or publicity permitted by this Code or in the case of a self-employed barrister remuneration paid to any clerk or other employee or staff of his chambers) to any person for the purpose of procuring professional instructions;
Provided that nothing in paragraph 307(d) or (e) shall prevent a barrister from paying a reasonable fee or fees required by an alternative dispute resolution body that appoints or recommends persons to provide mediation, arbitration or adjudication services, or from entering into a reasonable fee-sharing arrangement required by such a body, if the payment or arrangement is of a kind similar to that made by other persons who provide such services through the body.
“Imagine Power To The People” John Lennon
annabrella
March 17, 2013
And should there be any informal “old boy networks” operating within that formal compliance structure who pretend they do not understand the importnace of the Code and try to close ranks on each other then there is another protective mechanism in the UK to ensure such blockers are overcome and Justice prevails for and in the public interest.
LEGAL OMBUDSMAN (but note incumbent can be a male or female as post-holder is based on merit)
The Legal Ombudsman resolves legal complaints in a fair and independent way and so will not take sides. The Legal Ombudsman for England and Wales was set up by the Office for Legal Complaints (our Board) under the Legal Services Act 2007. Parliament wanted to simplify the system and make sure consumers had access to an independent expert to resolve complaints.
The service is open to all members of the public, very small businesses, charities, clubs and trusts and the service is free to these consumers.
They can get involved in different types of complaints about legal services. Some examples are wills, family issues such as divorce, personal injury and buying or selling a house. There are many others.
– The service is independent and impartial. This means that when they receive complaints, they will look at the facts in each case and weigh both sides of the story.
– They are not consumer champions or part of the legal profession, and are also independent of Government.
– If they decide the service you received was unsatisfactory, they can ask the lawyer and the firm to put it right. They may also say that they think that your lawyer provided a reasonable service – if they think this, they will explain why.
– Most complaints can be resolved informally. If needed, they will carry out a formal investigation. As this could involve them getting more information from you and your lawyer, it could take longer to deal with.
– Once an Ombudsman decision is accepted, they can make sure that the lawyer does do what they say is needed.
– They don’t have to investigate every complaint they receive, even if they have the power to do so. For example, they may decide not to investigate if they think the problem you have told them about has only had a slight impact on you.
– Their help doesn’t cover any disappointment you feel because you don’t agree with the outcome of a court case.
– They don’t write the rules for lawyers or police them if the rules are broken. This is the job of the different legal regulators.
– They are committed to ensuring value for money in how they run the Legal Ombudsman.
What sorts of lawyers can the Legal Ombudsman deal with?
The lawyers covered by this definition include:
• Barristers – regulated by the Bar Standards Board.
• Cost lawyers – regulated by the Cost Lawyers Standards Board.
• Legal executives – regulated by the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives Professional Standards.
• Licensed conveyancers – regulated by the Council for Licensed Conveyancers.
• Notaries – regulated by the Master of the Faculties.
• Patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys – regulated by the Intellectual Property Regulation Board.
• Registered European lawyers – regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
• Solicitors – regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
• Generally also employees of these businesses and partnerships.
They can look into complaints about legal services including:
• Buying and selling a house or property
• Family law such as divorce
• Wills
• Personal injury
• Intellectual property
• Criminal law
• Civil litigation
• Immigration
• Employment issues
There are others that they may also be able to look at. If an area is not on the list then you can contact them…
“Imagine Power To The People” John Lennon