Bar to issue statement today. While we wait for the Bar Council's full statement on Salleh Abas' allegation of double standars, do read the piece by . Krishnamoorthy in The Star h e r e.
Utusan Malaysia also has a story here.
So far, the closest the Bar Council gets to an official response is the following comment in the Bar's website h e r e.I concur
written by Ng Kong Peng, Thursday, October 23 2008 06:00 pm
I have just read Roger Tan's comment above and I concur with him.
Ng Kong Peng
Chairman
Legal Profession CommitteeNg was concurring with the following remarks by Mr Roger Tan:-
Bar Council acted without fear and favour
written by Roger Tan, Thursday, October 23 2008 04:20 pm
Dear all,
The current Bar Council's decision is a correct one. I am of the view that Rule 62 only allows the AG to waive the entire Rule 60 and not to waive it just to meet a particular application, in this case, Tun Salleh Abas'. Further, there is no cogent reason to have the entire rule waived.
It must be emphasised that just because the application is from Tun Salleh Abas, he should not be treated differently.
But then whether he should be treated similarly as Datuk KC Vohrah or any other case prior to this, my own view is that the previous Council had erred in its interpretation of Rule 60. Also, it is a golden rule that just because the previous Council had erred, Datuk KC Vohrah should not be punished for our error of judgment.
Further, just because we had erred previously does not also mean that we must continue with the wrong precedent.
In fact, I believe we have turned down many other applications from other eminent retired judges. This in fact begs the question whether we should now even re-look at the practice of allowing retired judges to practise or there should even be a cooling off period before they are allowed to do so.
All said, the Council acted without fear and favour when rejecting Tun Salleh's application.
Roger Tan
Friday, October 24, 2008
Ambiga concurs, too?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bias Council anyone?
ReplyDeleteperkataan popular tahun 2008,
ReplyDeleteBIDAS.
I really hope the law community will speak up and give their view.
ReplyDeleteA statement from Bar Council alone is not enough.
If they are really acting without Fear & Favor, then other issues that involving them and Zaid Ibrahim should also be debated
We cannot take their statement on face value.
Another piece of Bar Council jingoism - to get themselves out of a sticky and biased decision. C'mon you Malay lawyers, with all your highly expensive education, respond to this doubletalk - to this Orwellian argument - to this rule by Orwell's Pigs.
ReplyDeleteCatwoman
The moral of this story is :
ReplyDeleteIf you play with dogs, you get fleas.
Caninised Catwoman
Bro Rocky,
ReplyDeleteOne of post in the Bar Council's webpage states:
"a wrong precedent is no precedent".
Really?
The way the judiciary gets away from a wrong precedent is to qualify the law: where it is wrong, on which facts, bla bla..
Often one can also get away by distingushing cases.
A precedent is still a precedent.
Methinks this is just another case of "tolong kawan kawan".
How many judges are there raring to come back into the legal frat as consultants?
One of the statements seems to point to the Bar not wanting to (forgive the impression but I cannot but help cite this :)..) floodgate.
Cheers, Bro.
PS: Did Star and Utusan pick up from your posting on the matter?
Bro Rocky,
ReplyDeleteI dah bosanla cite psl bar council yang penuh dgn mat2/minah2 DAP + Hindraf cakap mcm ular...means ular lagi ok dari diaorg.
Bro Rocky,
ReplyDeleteI dah bosanla cite psl bar council yang penuh dgn mat2/minah2 DAP + Hindraf cakap mcm ular...means ular lagi ok dari diaorg.
Well rocky, bila terkena batang hidung sendiri barulah nak kata ikut undang-undang lah macam, macam-macam hal.
ReplyDeleteSebenarnya, mereka di Bar Council ni memang perkauman - jangan lah membohongi diri sendiri.
Jangan bohong rakyat malaysia - tetapi pembangkang akan tetap mendiamkan diri kerana tahu kalau buka mulut - kena lempang dengan Bar Council
pak nujum
it's funny how a former Chief Lord of Justice (no your ordinary judges) had his application turned down to practice
ReplyDeleteBro Bru,
ReplyDeleteYou are a man of Valour. A journalist par excellent. I could not remember Who quoted this,. i.e " Three kinds of professions that never betray the truth, i.e professor, theologist (including ulama') and judge. True blogger like yourself will the 4th profession that never betray the truth. I salute for your valour to expose the truth of those Devil Advocates in the Bar Council.
Ahmad Chavez
Abang Bru,
ReplyDeleteKabo kat Mat Nazri Aziz jangan dok korek hidung je masa kat parlimen tu, korek sikit fasal hal BAR COUNCIL nih. Ini precedent yang membahayakan.
Yob@Lenggong
i concur with biras.. bias council, did anyone said bullshit council? i concur with that too.
ReplyDeleteA truck driver would amuse himself by running over lawyers. Whenever he saw a lawyer walking down the side of the road he would swerve to hit him, enjoy the load, satisfying "THUMP", and then swerve back onto the road.
ReplyDelete(at this point some of you are probably wondering how the trucker could distinguish the lawyers from the humans. Obviously he saw the trail of slime they left!)
One day, as the truck driver was driving along he saw a priest hitchhiking. He thought he would do a good turn and pulled the truck over.
He asked the priest, "Where are you going, Father?"
"I'm going to the church 5 miles down the road," replied the priest.
"No problem, Father! I'll give you a lift. Climb in the truck." The happy priest climbed into the passenger seat and the truck driver continued down the road.
Suddenly the truck driver saw a lawyer walking down the road and instinctively he swerved to hit him. But then he remembered there was a priest in the truck with him, so at the last minute he swerved back away, narrowly missing the lawyer. However even though he was certain he missed the lawyer, he still heard a loud "THUD". Not understanding where the noise came from he glanced in his mirrors and when he didn't see anything, he turned to the priest and said, "I'm sorry Father. I almost hit that lawyer."
"That's okay", replied the priest. "I got him with the door!"
Doesn't the Bar Council follow the very much touted 'Doctrine of Stare Decisis' i.e. the policy of following previous decisions?
ReplyDeleteThe Bar Council has always spoken up on this issue of 'stare decisis' especially in many publicised trials and yet seems to relent on this particular issue.
Why is that so? We certainly do not want a misconception that there is racial and religious prejudice in the Council's decisions.
Hand Shake
Then shouldn't the PRESENT Bar Council retract the PREVIOUS Bar Council's approval?
ReplyDeleteAn error in judgement is an error in judgement.The same goes with 'a crime is a crime and it does not matter how long ago it was committed and the guilty can be thrown the book.' Also, an innocent likewise can be released from jail so long as there's proof of innocence.
"Without fear or favour"?
Yah, i will believe it when the PRESENT Bar Council takes the step to withdraw KC Vohrah's approval by the PREVIOUS Bar Council otherwise it's practising double-standards. Heck, i am not for bad precedences but let's do the rightful, okay?
Now, it will come down to just this - between the 'CAN and WON'T do it' truly lies the real sentiment of 'WITH' or 'WITHOUT' fear and favour.
Let's cut the rhetoric and put the money where your mouth is, Bar Council.
Obviously Bro, these hypocrites would want to protect one anothers backside by agreeing with each others view point.
ReplyDeleteSo since they mentioned it,the learned President of Bar Council, so called defender of justice, should come clean and PUBLICLY give out the list of eminent judges who applied to become consultants, who were approved and those who were given the run around(i.e not approved). Otherwise the Bar Council stands accused of practising discrimination using the Law as an excuse.
I hope defacto Law Minister YB Nazri is reading this blog as I believed the Bar Council itself is in a mess and should be reformed same as the reform that they wanted on the Judiciary. I suggest a procedure where the next candidates for Appointment of the President and the Executive Committe members must also be vetted by the Chief Judge and President of the Court of Appeal.
People who live in Glass Houses should never throw stones at others.
By the way, has anybody seen Zaid Ibrahim, he seem to be very quiet I wonder what he thinks of the bar Council's treatment of Tun Salleh...
And my question now is 'what if the next Bar Council Committee decides that the present Committee had erred with your present interpretation of the relevant Rule 60'? If such a situation arises, where do we go from there? The former PM never extend the peace-pipe to the Bar during his time. The current PM did try just the exact opposite. What would the new incoming PM do? A comparative study?
ReplyDeletemalsia1206
The Malaysian Bar has just issued a press statement on this. Read:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.malaysianbar.org.my/press_statements/malaysian_bar_s_press_release_clarification_on_appointment_as_consultant.html
aiya loyar ah, lagi mau pusing ah! lu pusing macam mana pun lu tetap juga termasuk didlm golongan yg cakap tak serupa bikin la!
ReplyDeleteBro rock..
ReplyDeleteyou're gonna get pretty less traffic soon with this kind of posting...
those f&$king b@stards people who enjoy bashing you with name calling & accusing as bias, as UMNO tools etc. are now speachless & resort to wank their own cock by now to release their frustration...
Even the Queen of Cock also never mention anything about this in her blog..scared of her own shadow she had deleted her recent posting about Najib..
loosers..
p/s: Hard-T ..I really loves your jokes..I cannot help myself reading it twice and laughing over & over again... hahhaha
-anti hindraf-
The Bar Council is now trembling
ReplyDeleteunder their robes as Mamakthir will be back at the steering wheel
very soon thats why they are hell bend at rejecting Tun Salleh Abas.
Roger Tan, K P Ng and Ambiga all
concur with each other, WHY, all
shit scared of Old Mamak's Return.
Thats the beauti of Malaysia, its
WHOM you know and NOT what you know
matters.
Kiwi
Bro,
ReplyDeletethe bar council that we are having in malaysia is actually not a 'bar council'according to my lawyer friends. they said, it's a 'secret council' behind bars. i concur their joke. joker flers!
well, for lawyers, technicalities is the name of the game
ReplyDeleteit is just a sophisticated way of justifying a double atandards adopted
the champion of meritocracy, democracy, fairness, non-racial system of governance, oh yeah?
dominant ideology anyone??
one that is imposed by the BAR COUNCIL
Bro Rocky:
ReplyDeleteImagine if these Hindraf+DAP+so-called freedom-of-everything fighter become our PM, DPM, minister or embee (MBs) with their racial mentality....
karl
Bar Council is practising double standard.
ReplyDeleteBar Council can lie to some of the people some of the time, but they cannot fool all the people all the time.
Bar Council are claiming the Malaysian judicial system is corrupted. Look in the mirror and see your ugly selfs first before judging others!
Bar Council is too racist....Enough is enough, its time we need our Mr PM to REVAMP the Bar Council Executive Council. Remove all those "ULAT2 BUSUK" !!
ReplyDelete(Anon From Kedah)
So now you know this team A and team B nonsense exist in any place in any country any where on earth including NSTP, UMNO, MCA and also the Bar Council. Lawyers pun cari makan juga. Their fraternity jargon is predators ... Wali Kota
ReplyDeleteSalam Bro,
ReplyDeleteIt's Roger Tan's personal view that the previous Council erred in interpreting Rule 60. So now, can we hear the present Council confirming what Tan has mentioned?
Otherwise, forget about the so-called acting without fear and favour. The present Council is still in fear of the previous Council who had favoured Datuk KC Vohrah. Double standards, pure and simple.
Am bigger than you
ReplyDeleteSo you listen to me
Am bigger mouth than you
so you listen to me
Am bigger head than you
so you listen to me
Am bigger hair than you
so you listen to me
I got power,
I can do whatever I want,
Am bigger than the bar council
Cause I hosted dinner with sacked judges
and tricked everyone into believing that I care
Ha ha ha
AM bigger
Am bigger
ambigger
For PRO UMNO people, we are still around. YEah, BAR council is not perfect but you see, they do respond to criticisms. Utusan and anti-Bar council organisations should not claim moral victory as they could even be worst managed.
ReplyDelete"I dah bosanla cite psl bar council yang penuh dgn mat2/minah2 DAP + Hindraf cakap mcm ular...means ular lagi ok dari diaorg."
Johnathan ... Please be careful and dun call the Indians as snake. Stick to the subject.
dear rocky,
ReplyDeletegood job, expose more on the bar council. Bar council only talk on behalf DAP and HINDRAF. Why? , because AMBIGA also hindraf may be. She the most racist person. Royal Comm must be established, Where Zaid Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang,Guan Eng, Tian Chua, Sivarasa, Karpal Singh and son Anwar Ibrahim, RPK all all those freedom champion, Why keep quite !!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
Antiracist.
Bar Council is full with hypocrisy..only make noise when the issue touch the right of the non Malay...the conduct of Bar Council in the past few months shows all
ReplyDelete(heha) : bar council ? aiyah ! can't even handle one miserable kulim mp = take him to court lah @#$%^&* !!
ReplyDeleteDear Amoker
ReplyDeleteREspond myfoot. Like Ms Cock, tak ada lah saya cakap, mana ada, tak adalah, tak ada.....zzzzz. Okeh, okeh tapi saya tak da cakap macam anjing punya makan, tak adalah tak da, tak da ...zzz okay, sorry, OK? Dont you undertstand, ? I said I AM SORRY OKAY????
BAR COUNCIL 2 x 5
and or yeah JONATHAN, sekarang bukan ular tapi mereka sudah fikir mereka sudah jadi ANOCONDA (betul ke spelling ?)
ambiga-ok
ReplyDeleteng kong peng- not so sure
roger tan- not ok at all
Yes.. bias council i say...
ReplyDelete