“The Cabinet should follow Tourism Minister Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz’s suggestion and let the Bar Council operate as it is.”

Nazri should be commended for suggesting the Malaysian Bar Council be allowed to run its own affairs, it added.

By speaking up, Nazri indicates that it was not a Cabinet decision to stifle the Bar Council, charged Ideas Chief Executive Wan Saiful Wan Jan in the statement.

“That means it must have been the action of one agency only.”

The Bar could be one of the many mechanisms to check and balance the Executive, he argued. “Nazri is right in saying the government does not need to clamp down on groups that are critical of them.”

He finds it interesting that Nazri actually mentioned this point.

Wan Saiful recalled the move to amend the Legal Profession Act 1976 was made immediately after the Malaysian Bar openly criticised the Attorney-General.

He wonders if the move was initiated by the government as a whole, or was the Attorney-General making a personal and unilateral retaliation. “It does look like the Malaysian Bar was being punished for exercising its independence,” he said.

In mature democracies, he pointed out, it was common for different institutions to be critical of each other. “They do it out of love for the country,” said Wan Saiful.

For example, he said, in the United Kingdom even the Prime Minister can get publicly reprimanded by other individuals in government. “The Prime Minister is not infallible.”

Back in December 2010, former British Prime Minister David Cameron received a written rebuke from the Head of the Civil Service, Sir Gus O’Donnell, for his special adviser’s actions. “Cameron took it in good stead,” said Wan Saiful.

The amendment to the Legal Profession Act was expected to severely impact the Bar Council. It requires a higher quorum of 4,000 for the Malaysian Bar’s General Meetings. At present, it’s 500 members for a quorum.