Deputy law and institutional reform minister M Kulasegaran said the measures approved by the Cabinet on Aug 1 were intended to enhance the board’s accountability.
Among others, they will require the board to table an annual report of its activities in Parliament.
LPQB membership will also be expanded to make it more inclusive, with greater representation from various stakeholders in the legal profession including the Malaysian Bar, academic staff from private institution law faculties, and legal practitioners from Sabah and Sarawak.
Kulasegaran said the position of deputy chairman would be created, while the board would be required to convene at least six meetings a year.
“It is hoped that with these enhancements, LPQB will become more effective and efficient in carrying out its functions relating to qualifications for admission into the legal profession,” Bernama reported him as saying during Question Time in the Dewan Rakyat today.
Kulasegaran was responding to S Kesavan (PH-Sungai Siput), who wanted to know what actions were being taken by the government to reform and improve LPQB, which had failed to perform one of its statutory responsibilities under the Legal Profession Act 1976 (Act 166) since 1985.
Kulasegaran said the failure in question referred to LPQB’s decision to discontinue the registration of articled clerks, one of its statutory functions under the Act.
He said the board had provided justification for this decision, including the lack of infrastructure to conduct articled clerkship courses and the existence of sufficient alternative pathways for law graduates to qualify as advocates and solicitors in Malaysia.
“In March 2025, LPQB submitted a proposal for the government’s consideration to amend Act 166 to formally abolish the provisions related to articled clerkship. The proposal is currently under detailed review by the prime minister’s department’s legal affairs division,” he said.
In response to Zulkifly Jusoh (PN-Besut), who asked whether LPQB had formally breached its statutory duties, Kulasegaran said the board’s failure to implement the articled clerkship programme since 1985, despite its inclusion in the Act, amounted to a serious oversight.
He said while LPQB had carried out its other statutory functions, its unilateral decision to discontinue articled clerkship without official government approval had significant legal implications.
“In 1985, LPQB recommended that the government abolish articled clerkship, but the government at the time did not provide any feedback.
“Subsequently, the board decided on its own to cease the programme, which in my view was a clear act of negligence,” he said.
On Tuesday, the Federal Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision that LPQB acted beyond its powers when it abolished the articled clerkship or professional practical training programme in the legal field.