I'm not sure whether the Bar Council issued this press release to clarify the posting I made here or the articles that appeared in The Star or/and Utusan Malaysia. No reference is made in the press release to any of the above.
The explanation does not explain why the Bar refused to give dispensation to Salleh Abas and apply its discretion through Rule 62 when it had done so with KC Vohrah. It is this apparent unwillingness to apply the same privilege to the former Lord President that has brought about the perception that the Bar practises double-standards.
If there had been a "mistake" in giving KC Vohrah dispensation, why is that mistake not being admitted here?
But then again, the precedence in the form of KC Vohrah is not even mentioned in the press release!
If the Bar Council is hoping to close the issue with this sorry excuse of a press release, I'm really disappointed with it.
Friday, October 24, 2008
A non-explanatory explanation
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Fahmi’s appointments that say it won’t be business as usual anymore
KL, Mar 06 : IT’S still early in the game but young Minister Fahmi Fadzil seems to be making all the right moves. The appointment of bill...
Nov 23: The 16th Yang DiPertuan Agong has probably seen more political drama than all his predecessors combined. Since assuming the throne ...
Updated 1234pm Nov 05 // Read also EdisiSiasat and Latifah Koyak: Moneypulasi WHEN TOMMY THOMAS was the Attorney-General, new and smelling l...
This nation call 'Bar Council' and those people's who govern the so call nation...!!
It's seem similar to a country call Malaysia in it..rules and governing in nature....or rather they are in same league of some soth..!!!
Here I would like to call again the "People's Parliament" and the Rep's ...the 'Yang BerBloggers'...YBb's to convince a sitting and dealt the matter concern immediately.
Thank you from Latuk Seli Teypin....session adjourn..!!
so, who is being marginalised and who have preferential treatment here?ReplyDelete
how come its ok for him but not for me?
umno must explain this! ooooops bar council does it report to umno too?
so what say you ambiga?
why there is double standards when the rules are clear?
- yes2hinsaf no2hindrogue no2hinzir
Could it be that Vohrah had at least 10 years experience on the Malaysian Bar as opposed to Salleh who, according to the Bar statement, will only complete his 10 years next March? Perhaps you or the Bar could enlighten us.ReplyDelete
It's not double standards. It's because they have no power to do so. What they did for KC Vohrah or whoever else before was an incorrect application of the section. If Tun Salleh Abas disagrees, he should either seek a declaration in court for the interpretation of the section or an action for judicial review of the bar council's decision.ReplyDelete
Hypocrisy at its best; Tun Salleh Abas was treated with the greatest disrespect by the Bar Council who had used elderly people like Tun Salleh Abas to further their selfish personal gains – to be seen as champions for reforming the Malaysian Judiciary. That’s one exemplary manner Ms Ambiga justifies her datukship – true; there are Malaysians less deserving to get a datukship than Shah Rukh Khan. Supposedly championing the cause of democratic reforms for legal, racial and religious liberty and tolerances but in the end it’s the same color that decides the prejudices. My hat to Ms Ambiga and all her liberal reformist counterparts in the Bar Council, DAP and PKR – cakap tak serupa bikin in coming up with lame excuses.ReplyDelete
rocky, what the different between KC and Abbas that KC got the exemption and Abbas did not. Can you see it. You still cant spot the differences? Who is the bar council presedent and who is KC to Ambiga. Can you spot any different between Ambiga and KC if none then compare Ambiga with Abass. Still cant get it yeah?ReplyDelete
Yeah! Why is Bar Council so quiet about KC Vohrah case. Practising double standard. That's why Tun Mahathir couldn't care less with Bar Council. Tun already knew. And they are so proud of the Justice Walk at Putrajaya. Tsk..Tsk.ReplyDelete
This is one example of those who shouts MALYASIAN MALAYSIA...but in fact they hold GRUDGES and MAlice against Malay !ReplyDelete
Merits !!!!......Tun Salleh Abbas is above MERITS for being the ex-LP
It clearly proves that NON MALAYS will do the same things towards Malays if they ever got hold of the Federal Government !
See how Indians behaves...by just controlling Bar Councils....they demonstrate their arrogance by being DOUBLE STANDARDS.
I being a non malay felt ashame of these injustices.
Go to hell with Malaysian Malaysia.
Go to hell to those who makes politics their struggle !
Go to hell to those who is playing politics in any organisations !
We...the normal citizens of Malaysia just want a peaceful nation where we can bring up our families.
I think this Council of Chocolate Bar need to reform their council. They think they are lawyer and know everything about law and can do what they can about manipulation of the law.Old saying said one of criteria to be a lawyer you need to have tongue twisted and pandai goreng. That's why when you talk with this kind of people, you only need to say only one 'word'. You know about the word.
(heha) : aiyah, one mistake cukup lah why ulangi lagi !!ReplyDelete
When the other party plays the game "We can whatever we want" then they are not much different than the government who won GE12 with a landslide victory.
But the FREEEcondom of speech supporters are too blind to see.
Ain't that a bitch i would say.
I shiver to think that this ambiga is the niece of judge gopal ram.
Gopal ram bring back bitter memory of lina joy.
i can see the connection here.
ARTICLE 11 -- GOPAL RAM -- AMBIGA -- SOAP BAR COUNCIL.
It seems that Bar Council is no different than Karaoke Bar. A lot of prostitutes there.ReplyDelete
A lot of snakes there who talk with twisted tongues. People who decreed that double-standard and discrimination are for them to practice but not for others.
People who talk about equality and fairness but only to be practiced to them and their communities but not to others.
People who with a slightest smell of power who will trample into others.
Should we put these people behind the Bar?
the bar council president is indian, vohrah is indian, tun is not indianReplyDelete
I don't know why people should be surprised or disappointed by this. The Bar Council is just another trades union whose sole purpose is to further the interests of its members.ReplyDelete
Are you being deliberately obtuse or plain dense?
It has been made amply clear that Salleh does not have the requisite min 10 yrs experience at MB.
Ref your previous posting on this same subject, Vohrah's case was conceded as erroneous.
Whither your common sense, Rocky?
Should we not learn from mistakes? or must mistakes be repeated to satisfy your particular and very selective standards of fairness?
Whither your objectivity, Rocky?
Sdr Rocky, saya teringat sidang DUN Perak dimana seorang Adun dikritik mengenai cerita ULAR. Bila difikirkan, ada kebenaran persoalan cerita ULAR tu. Saya tak ingat nama Adun tu tapi saya ucapkan Tahniah pada beliau sbb bagi peringatan pada org Melayu.ReplyDelete
SUKU SAKAT KALI ULAR!
Dear Anonymous (9:18am),ReplyDelete
Is there anywhere in the Bar Council's press statement did it mention that the previous Council's decision was wrong on allowing KC Vohrah to be admitted as consultant even though he did not meet with the 10 year requirement?
Would be wonderful to get a comment from the previous Bar Council's President on the issue.
Is there any chance that the current Bar Council's interpretation of the Rule is wrong?
imagine if bar council rule federal government and ambiga is the pm ?ReplyDelete
When playing dirty politics...alot of Malaysians are still sitting on the fence...and sadly..even the Bar Council.ReplyDelete
If one is clearly for or against change of government...nothing will be unclear.
Applying to agree to disagree and travel the middle road in politics is the most cunning art of all.
Middle roads are for way of life...not on politics..that is so dirty and corrupted.
I read so many spins.so many flip flogs...I think Malaysia deserves to be screwed up.
My suspicion is the Govt has succeeded in subverting the Bar Council (thru Ambiga). How do you explain Ambiga's datukship given when she's holding the top BC post? Can anybody recall a precedent where a sitting President of BC awarded datukship or Tan Sriship or other titles?ReplyDelete
From: Drinking Bar
On the contrary, I see the hypocrisy is within Salleh Abas! This old man was "buddy-buddy" with Ambiga to whack TDM.
clearcut evidence that they are politicians FIRST before they are legal experts ???ReplyDelete
Rocky, I believe you are really barking on the wrong tree. The perception you have moulded your readers top believe is that Tun Salleh has been deprived to practice meaning being deprived of earning a decent livelihood. This is definitely not the case. Tun Salleh is now practising as a partner of his legal firm as he is still a member of the bar council. Nobody is depriving Tun Salleh from practising and he do not need the blessing from the AG nor the Bar Council to practise. That's a fact. He is applying to have the title "consultant" which of course carries more status as not all member of the bar can be a consultant as you would need to fulfill the relevant rule 50. Indeed, there was a special dispensation made to Vohrah to allow him to practice as a consultant, this special dispensation is not favoured by the present Bar Council to handle matters such as this. Therefore they have taken the initiatives to liberise rule 60 further so as it can have within its ambit the provision to provide for such a ciscumstance in the event it arise. By having a proper rule to handle matters suuch as this takes away the discretionary or arbitrary power that might be conceived as double standards or unfair. I think this is a fair and right proposition by the Bar Council. Rocky I believe you have a responsibility to explain to all your readers that Tun Salleh has not being deprived from practising as a lawyer. This is a fact. Not explanining this is irresponsible and dangerous. Let me categorically explain that I am not a lawyer and I do not represent the Bar Council. As usual I am chi8.ReplyDelete
I believe what most people are overlooking is that a consultant cannot be jointly and severally liable in a legal firm.
Maybe that is the reason why Tun Salleh has applied to be a consultant.
He can still practice as a lawyer but generally speaking, he does not have to worry about the problems that come with being a partner in a legal firm.
I could be wrong in my understanding.
Wonderful if a lawyer can confirm this.
Next time, please apply to the Mini Bar. The Bartenders will ensure that a decision will be made within 2 months.ReplyDelete
this nonsense bar council issue really put vohrah in a hot curry. tak raya la aney tu monday ni. anyway, "dewali vaaartikkel vohrah".
the govt should BAR the COUNCIL and get the best of its members to institute another free-and-neutral body.
the present one is full of members with vested political interest. we need people like pandikar amin mulia (is he a lawyer?) to manage such a council.
the council is becoming another 'thorn in the flesh' of the government with their inappropriate manners.
that's why they'll be the first group to walk to hell...
Fact is Tun Salleh was an ex-LP because he is Malay.ReplyDelete
Fact is KC Vohrah is not Malay.
Still cannot understand?
Please Pakatan take over this country now and get rid of all this bloody bullshit once for all.
- Truly Malaysian -
Rocky, What I heard is quite disturbing. Tun Salleh never personally asked the Bar Council. It's all done by the partners of the firm, Dato Yaacob and his wife Tunku Sofiah, and of course now their son Megat.ReplyDelete
Tun already told everyone at the 17 July Bar Dinner that he's more interested in farming and talking to the trees. So, why is this firm so gung ho about it? Maybe Tun is not even interested in practice or remaining in the firm.
Talk had it that Tun Salleh has fallen out with them because the couple - once great supporters and relatives of Tengku Razeleigh vowed never to talk to Tun Mahathir again, are now close friends of Tun M. So Tun Salleh so pissed off lash because Tun M sacked Tun Salleh! In the Lingam inquiry, Tunku Sofiah even acted as counsel for Tun Mahathir!!! Veri farnie...
So you Rocky Bru and gang, if u bother to ask any senior lawyers, they will tell you in the 1988 judicial crisis, the Bar fought for judicial independence and not Tun Salleh. As a judge, Tun Salleh wasn't of good temperament and some lawyers even preferred to appear before the old Lord President Tun Hamid!.
So Rocky you have fallen into the trap and let you blog once again be used for racial bashing.
Vohrah's application was approved years ago and not by the present Council who looked at principles and not personalities. If you had checked the legal directory on the Bar Council's website, KC Vohrah was called to the Bar on 19.12.1964. This means Vohrah must have practised for sometime before he became a judge.
If Tun Salleh and the sacked judges really want to be remembered as good men, they must reveal how much we taxpayers had paid him as compensation. This's hypocrisy and Tun Salleh should learn to be grateful for what the Bar did for him!
Read your posts and comments again, please. None of you know what the real issue. None of you know what is the solution. Worse, I believe that none of you would take the effort to implement the solution.ReplyDelete
So stop your useless comments. We have nation-building to do and it's such a waste of human talent to indulge in trivia blogging and comments.
Rocky you want to know why??ReplyDelete
......simply because they are racist!!!! Don't you see???
ambiga go back and practise in Tamil Naidu laaa There you dont need to be racist...
Dear Bar CouncilReplyDelete
YOUR STATEMENT IN PARA 4
…it cannot be applied to specific individual lawyer, and if applied to waived any rule it must be applied to all
Isn’t Vohrah a specific individual lawyer?
YOUR STATEMENT IN PARA 5
..continuous efforts to right the wrong of that era
What about the wrong of Bar Council in Vohrah’s case?
Why let him continue?
The council openly admitted it was a wrong precedent!
If it is wrong, does merely admitting it being wrong, but yet letting him continue, makes it right?
Is that what you call fair judgement?
1998 JUDICIAL CRISIS
Were Salleh and the Judicial ‘attacked’ or actually ‘counter attacked’.
Why your pursuit of truth skipped the part that Salleh had problems with the King, whom instructed Mahathir to act (according to Mahathir).
Don’t you guys normally unearth the motive to prove your claim?
Or is putting all the blame on Mahathir satisfy your pursuit?
If not, why ignores his sides of the story?
Don’t you think the nation needs to know the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
WITH THIS BEHAVIOR, DO YOU REALLY WANT US TO BELIEVE THAT YOU GUYS ARE THE RIGHTEST PERSON TO APPOINT JUDGES?
Please answer us with No Fear or Favour. We deserve the truth.
Use this chance to clear the air, once and for all.
I would like to call upon Salleh Abbas as often called by Tun M's detractors to him.ReplyDelete
Tun Salleh, kubur kata mari, rumah kata pergi.
Enough is enough.
Rocky, a good Title... A-non-explanatory Explanation.
An explanation that does not explain. Ha ha ha. I now know why you're have many followers.
Good job bro
Agree with Oik that the Bar Council is another trade union, the only difference being this trade union likes to pretend to be a defender of justice and fair play. What bloody nonsense.ReplyDelete
I've always wondered why Zulifli Nordin got hot under the collar when they tried to organise the apostasy forum. Now I know.
Thanks Rocky for letting us see through the facade and don't let up until they squeal.
So what's the Bar Council trying to say now?ReplyDelete
Maybe Tun Salleh can apply to be a legal assistant?
Dear Tun Salleh,ReplyDelete
Please join in any 'open house' function with Tun Dr. Mahathir and talk things over.
Two heads are always better than one.
they talk about equallity,they seek transparentcies,they want to elect the judges but they(bar council) are bullshitting,practising double standard,bias and in fact they are racist and they are the puppet of the opposition and in another word of saying they are anti establishment.-mat klentongReplyDelete
Dear Internet citizens,ReplyDelete
Please have a look at this blog.
To Peen and Chi8ReplyDelete
Looks like me, sound like me, but I yem veeeeerrry sureeee it not meee! poodah
To No Balls @ 4:22ReplyDelete
WTF by that "maybe"?
You are so typical!
HA HA all those comment pro Ambgia and Pro Salleh. Hey! do you think Tun Salles is stupid? Come one man. He once the Lord President. He even have the guts to sent a letter to the Agong complaining of the noise whereas others do not dare. He know law more that us infact he on top of other including Ambiga. He the Ex Load President. Who is Ambiga? He got Datukship for defending Tun Salleh I guess, cause I dont know what other contirbution she did beside trying to champion other religion to be on par with Islam.Tun Salleh is not naive, that why he know he eligible to apply 'that'privilege. Unfortunately Tun Salleh is so smart that Ambiga seem to show him how it suppose to work by using him for her interest. Thinking of that, did Tun really get the 'money' or it just a gimmick. There no evience or news how much he get and who actually paid him. At least we know when EPF money is being used to bail out companies and it still ok since when thing get better we get something. In the case of Tun if our money is being used, it not an investment it called 'free money' and we get nothing. Ambiga and the Bar council has shown therr true color and UMNO is no longer defending Malays. Datuh Ahmad the UMNO branch leader say 'chinese are pendatang and all news broke hell but when Gerakan women CHIEF... CHIEF.. saya MALAY ARE PENDATANG what happens? UMNO act like 'Pekak Badak'. Non of UMNO leader dare to tell Gerakan Mr Knoo to take action against her. Datuk Ahmad talk about the fact in history while Gerakan Women leader talk the 'UNFACT' of history. Should she get the same treatement like Datuk Ahmad, it seems none and she get a scott free!. GO to hell with PAS and PKR. They talk for their survival only not for Malays neither the Nation. PAS Selangor/Perak is so scare to oppose or let hell break loose just tp protect their senator ship and just to show that they are part of 'kerajaan' negeri. Anwar Ibrahim why you so quite in the issue of 'Melayu Pendatang'?. It ok for other to label you a MALAY/MELAYU who created 'Malay' rule as what history is written but it not ok for Anwar Ibrahim if he say such thing to others? Bar council and Ambiga you make me 'puke'ReplyDelete
now u knew the most liberal people in malaysia is MALAY.
50 years ago malay allow others to be citizens. allow them to participate in politic, have their own school, asked for may things etc. Malay said tak pa la.
now you see, if you are too liberal others will step on your head. The people is only president of BC, they already bullied us. This is the people who going to rule our country. they will surpress us systematically.
i say, rocky..ReplyDelete
vernon, the entertainment blogger snapped a photo of you and two other "famous bloggers" (as he described the three of you) Engku Emran and Nuraina Samad, at the SuriaFM open house.
(heha) : mr. antubuil, pls write again sekali, i sudah 3 kali baca your posting ...sorilah...not veri understanding, my inggeris is not veri gooding one ( malu lah) ...so pls rite again one more time, slowly...slowly...dun rite cepat cepat, i afraid cannot folow you ok ...rite s-l-o-w-l-y dun fastly ok...tankyou you sir veri much !!ReplyDelete
They ask for equallity,transparencies,openess but they are nonsense.they are bias,practising double standard and they are bullshiting.they are the mouth and puppet of the opposition and infact they are racist and I'll term them as the "PARIAH OF THE HIGHEST DEGREE"-mat klentongReplyDelete
Bro, I personally really have high regards for you.ReplyDelete
But this time around, you really screwed up man.. You should have done your homework before making such an incriminatory statement.
Don't you feel responsible that now, some section of the public seems to think that Tun Salleh cannot even practice as a lawyer even though it is entirely untrue? I think, as a responsible journalist/blogger, you should clarify that in a separate article.
Another thing, your article has instigated racist remarks being made in here. Against Ambiga and against each other. It breaks my heart to see them. Some of us are trying so hard to fight against these set of mentalities. To promote racial relation. We know very well that the decision made by Bar Council is not one based on race.
I believe you are not racist and you want what we want. So does it not bother you that these racist perceptions are expressed (and read) by the public after having read your article? Pen is definitely mightier than sword.
Having said all that, and having read the comments (apart from the comment on the internal brawl between Tun Salleh and Tunku Sofiah - which I will not touch here), I believe Bar Council's hands are tight.
The mistake was made my the previous Council members - for whatever reason. And the mistake WAS implied in the press statement. But of course, what we want is an expressed admission that the previous Council members made a mistake with regard to KC Vohrah's appointment and we didn't get that.
But let us look at it from another point of view, the Bar Council has indeed applied for Rule 60 to be amended (using Rule 62 by an application to the AG) and it will be implemented in 2009.
By 2009, Tun Salleh will be allowed to become a Consultant.
To expressly admit a mistake made by the previous Council would entail the current Council to have to reopen KC Vohrah's file and if he really did not meet the Rule 60 requirement, to retract the consent. As one of the commenters in here said, it will open the floodgates - of litigation, of complaints, and of bad publicity.
And what we are looking at is a mere few months before Rule 60 is officially amended and all previous appointments will be validated (I believe the amendment will be made to have effect in retrospect). And also for Tun Salleh to be able to be a Consultant, as he wishes.
So they made the decision, to not avail themselves to having to open the can of worms. It is not just to protect themselves, it also to protect Tun Salleh, KC Vohrah and the likes of them. As these are learned and respected public figures. I can imagine how tough it is for them to make such a decision, having to choose the lesser of the two evils. But they did it. And I respect them for having the balls for it.
Over and above that, this is an internal matter of the Bar. The internal matter of the Bar is not something that must be open for public debate. It is a professional body. It will be open in the Bar Council AGM. And it will be debated in there by the members.
I must therefore say that your act in championing Tun Salleh's cause is premature. And..it is not your place to question the decision. More so when you do not know the whole story.
I seriously hope you would consider writing another article to control the damage that you have done.
Still have high regards for you albeit shakily,
Dunno about you, Rock.ReplyDelete
Reminds me of a Bar (well its a Pub) back in Roath, Cardyyd ;-) where we spend time on bitter talking kok of what is wrong with Other people (and the country).
Its the blardy Bar! Just plain talk.
MRSM Kalae Chepo 66/73