She described the amendments, scheduled to be tabled in Parliament next month, as an attempt to “control and silence” the Bar and threatening its independent stature.
Nair said the proposed amendments were never sought by the Bar Council or its Penang committee.
She said it was “totally unacceptable” that part of the government’s reforms was to include two appointees in the Bar Council to “represent the government”.
Nair also felt it was unacceptable that a federal minister in charge of law would be also empowered to dictate internal workings, via the amendment of the electoral rules and regulations within the Malaysian Bar.
She said the present electoral system in the Bar had worked well to represent all member states’ interests for the past 40 years.
“The existing system strikes a proper balance between proportional representation and protecting the interests of the states.
“It is far more democratic and fair as compared with the state centric system that is being proposed by the government,” she said in a talk to Penang Bar members at Green Hall Tuesday evening. Council president Steven Thiru and immediate past president Christopher Leong were also present.
Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali had said the government’s decision to amend the LPA was to make the Bar Council more “transparent, democratic and return it to its original purpose”.
The amendments to the LPA are expected to severely impact the Bar Council. It requires a higher quorum of 4,000 for the Malaysian Bar’s general meetings. At present, the required quorum is 500. The quorum adjustment is one of seven proposed changes to the LPA.
Nair said the government’s proposal “would not provide a fairer or better electoral system” for elections to the council and its office bearers.
“The amendments will seriously compromise the ability of the Malaysian Bar to act without “fear or favour” in upholding “the cause of justice”.
Nair added although it was not immediately known why the government was eager to meddle with the council’s affairs, the timing of such change raised questions about its motives.
“The timing of these proposals raises the question as to whether it is a reaction on the part of the government against the unwavering position adopted by the Malaysian Bar in respect of important rule of law issues.
“This includes serious issues of accountability, transparency and corruption that engulfs our country at this time.
“We reject the proposed amendments and call on the government to withdraw them immediately,” she added.
In a column in Berita Harian Ahad in July, AG Apandi cited several shortfalls in the Bar Council, and hoped the amendments would fix them.
Apandi claimed the amendments were necessary “to ensure a better relationship between the Bar Council and the government”.
More recently, defacto law minister Azalina Othman Said said the proposed amendments were not to control the Bar Council, as the amendments were made in accordance with Section 42 (1) (1) of the LPA, which promoted good relations and social interaction among members involved in the administration of law in Malaysia.
The Bar Council was formed under the Advocates and Solicitors’ Ordinance 1947 and later fell under the purview of the LPA. A total of 17,049 advocates and solicitors are registered as members as of July 12.
Related stories: