The Way Forward

Oct–Dec 2011 www.malaysianbar.org.my

Chronicle of the Malaysian Bar The Way Forward PLUS Is Judicial Independence Now Constitutionally Extinct? World Indigenous Day Celebration 5th China-ASEAN Forum on Legal Cooperation and Development (CAFTA 2011)

In collaboration with

For Malaysian Bar circulation only

Contents

PRAXIS CHRONICLE OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR Contents President’s Message Readers’ Comments Editorial BAR COUNCIL MALAYSIA Features/Articles BAR COUNCIL 15 Leboh Pasar Besar 50050 Kuala Lumpur 7 Is Judicial Independence Now Constitutionally Extinct? Tel No: (603) 2050 2050 Fax No: (603) 2026 1313 / (603) 2034 2825 / (603) 2072 5818 15 Doing What is Right Email Add: [email protected] Website: http://www.malaysianbar.org.my 22 An Overview of the Bar Council Library 28 The “Four Judges Rule” MEMBERS OF BAR COUNCIL MALAYSIA 2011/2012 32 Improving the Standards of Advocacy President: Lim Chee Wee Vice-President: Christopher Leong 34 Human Writes – The Curious Case of April Ashley Secretary: Tony Woon Yeow Thong Treasurer: Steven Thiru Events

Bar Council LexisNexis 44 5th China-ASEAN Forum on Legal Cooperation and Syamsuriatina Ishak – Editor Ivan Yap Min Kee – Contract Publishing Manager Development (CAFTA 2011) Azman Thaiyub Khan – Assistant Editor Annie Yeoh – Associate Editor Chua Ai Lin – Senior Officer/Assistant Editor Ryan Yee - Design & Production 46 Fun in the Sun at Cherating, Kuantan Anis Taufik – Assistant Officer Hasnizam Mohamad – Marketing & Advertising Nishta Jiwa – Marketing & Advertising Noor Arianti Osman, Fahri Azzat, Aston Paiva, Lifestyle David Mathew & Janet Chai – Editing Team 48 Advertorial — Berjaya Times Square Theme Park 49 Advertorial — The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association 50 Advertorial — Nissan Teana Car Review 51 Advertorial — Executive Health Screening at IJN LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn Bhd 52 Geng Terjah – At Home With Nature T1-6, Jaya 33, 3, Jalan Semangat Seksyen 13, 46100 Petaling Jaya Selangor Darul Ehsan Malaysia Sports Tel: (603) 7882 3500, Fax: (603) 7882 3506 State Bar News Praxis is the official publication of Bar Council Malaysia, published quarterly in collaboration with LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn Bhd, for circulation to Members of the Malaysian Bar.

Bar Council Malaysia, and its authorised authors and designers of Praxis, accept no liability for any Book Review loss arising from the use of, or reliance on, Praxis. Bar Council Malaysia does not warrant the accuracy of the contents thereof or any statement made by the contributors, writers or advertisers herein, 66 Creating Value From Technology Innovation and does not accept responsibility or liability in relation thereto. Statements of contributors, writers or advertisers herein represent their personal views and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bar Council or the Malaysian Bar. All users are permitted to view the content of Praxis, without prejudice By the Way ... to the intellectual property rights belonging to Bar Council Malaysia. However, any unauthorised reproduction, duplication, transmission or alteration, in any form or by any means, whether in part or in whole, of Praxis, is strictly prohibited. Bar Council Malaysia also prohibits the use of Praxis and all 68 Cartoon & Sudoku or any of its contents herein, for commercial and/or personal gain, profit or sale. 69 Long Call Speech © 2011 All rights reserved.

Enquiries on advertising: Bar Updates/Notices Hasnizam Mohamad — [email protected] Nishta Jiwa — [email protected] 70 Summary of Circulars Article contribution: 73 New Admissions to the Malaysian Bar Bar Council Malaysia welcomes letters, articles, views and news (including photographs) for possible inclusion in Praxis. However, Bar Council Malaysia reserves the right not to publish or to edit those 75 Library Updates — New Books, Legislation published for content, clarity, style and space considerations. Contributions and enquiries may be 84 Disciplinary Orders directed to [email protected]. 85 Notice Regarding Documents in Bar Council’s Custody Circulation: 14,000

Cover Photo Credit: Simon and Lisa Thomas

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 1 President’s Message

The Bar Stands Firm under Attack, and the Challenges Ahead — New CJ and Liberalisation of Legal Profession

Dear Members, the building, as well as on a number of gratitude also goes to the staff at my private cars parked outside. There has law firm, for weathering the unexpected The Bar is no stranger to criticism and been no indication of the identity of the protests and threats. The support shown opposition from both within and without, perpetrator(s) of this act of vandalism. by Members of the Bar for Bar Council’s but it is alarming and unacceptable when work in upholding the cause of justice is the detractors resort to trespass, theft and When JMM was subsequently called in for also deeply appreciated. vandalism and the police condone such questioning in early September, however, behaviour by virtue of their sheer inaction. the representatives expressed shock at the Unfortunately, Bar Council is not alone allegation of theft. under attack. Individual Members of the After Friday prayers on 29 July 2011, Bar have also come under attack and been a group of individuals claiming to Two days later, on 9 Sept 2011, demonised by critics who disagree with represent Jaringan Melayu Malaysia almost a dozen JMM representatives Members of the Bar who carry out their (“JMM”) gathered outside Bar Council’s gathered outside my law firm, chanting professional duties without fear or favour. premises — with the media in tow — “Hancur Majlis Peguam” and “Hancur Lim and attempted to enter the building to Chee Wee”, while displaying posters A newspaper and a television station deliver a memorandum, while chanting decrying Bar Council as racist and calling published news disparaging Manjeet Singh slogans of protest against Bar Council. for my resignation, again with the media Dhillon, in connection with his role as After negotiation with the staff, the at the ready. counsel in an ongoing criminal proceeding, memorandum was handed over at the and his request to the court to cite the security area on the ground floor. During While we resolutely defend the right of prosecution for contempt. The reports the gathering, however, two Bar Council everyone — including supporters and stated that a Member of Parliament had banners displayed on the façade of the opponents of Bar Council alike — to accused him of causing disrepute to the building were removed, and five banners assemble peacefully to voice their views, image of the government, because he was denouncing Bar Council were put up by we deplore the acts of theft, trespass and motivated by anti-government sentiment, JMM at various positions on the exterior vandalism that were committed, and the and in order to further the interests of wall and banisters, proclaiming: hostility they evidence. the opposition. We commend High Court • “Tutup!! Tutup!! Majlis Peguam”; Judge Dato’ Akhtar Tahir for censuring • “Majlis Peguam Prejudis”; Unfortunately, JMM are not the only the media for its “personal attack on the • “Bar Council Saddler for DAP”; individuals who have crossed the line counsel but also on the court”. • “Majlis Peguam Tidak Professional”, in expressing their displeasure at Bar and Council. For the past few months, a victim Another Member of the Bar, Karpal Singh, • “JMM mahu Majlis Peguam Bebas & of financial dishonesty of a lawyer (the was also reproached in connection with Bukan Jadi Kuda Tunggangan DAP”. victim’s claim for compensation from the performance of his professional duties. Bar Council was rejected on account A Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Police personnel, who had stationed of his out-of-court settlement with the Department reportedly contended that themselves across the street early on, dishonest lawyer of his suit against him), politicians should not be permitted to watched the events unfold without taking has threatened to assault, if not kill, the practise law because politician-lawyers, any action to stop the trespass, theft and Office Bearers and the staff members of such as Karpal, mix law and politics, as vandalism. When Bar Council lodged the Bar Council Secretariat, and the staff allegedly demonstrated by his role and a police report against these acts, the at my law office unless his demands for stance in the current and previous charges police claimed not to have witnessed the compensation were satisfied. Whilst we against Anwar Ibrahim. dismantling of the Bar Council banners, sympathise with his predicament, his but did not deny having observed the five violent and threatening behaviour cannot Another Member of the Bar, whose name banners being affixed. be tolerated. The Bar is pursuing this I am not at liberty to reveal, received death matter with the police. threats (one in the form of bullets in the In the following day’s press, JMM mail) to stop representing a client in a representatives were reported as having I must thank the staff members of the Bar particular matter and had Molotov cocktail taken down the Bar Council’s banners. Council Secretariat who have, through thrown into his house. Early that same morning, the acronym the years, been steadfast and courageous “DAP” was found spray-painted in in the face of numerous such protests These three incidents reveal a failure by large letters on all the external walls of at their doorstep and such threats. My irresponsible individuals to grasp the

2 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 President’s Message

principle that lawyers must, in discharging been eliminated through decisions in The Malaysian Bar looks forward to their professional obligations, act to the disputes involving Constitutional questions working with Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria, Tan best of their abilities and in their clients’ and jurisdictional conflict, which affect Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus Sharif and Tan Sri best interests. Lawyers perform a vital the public interest. The Federal Court, Dato’ Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin in their function when they act for their clients in in particular, ought to have fulfilled its new capacities. the pursuit of justice, and that they must responsibility to right an injustice, no be permitted to carry out these functions matter how difficult or divisive the issues The Bar will soon be sailing into uncharted freely, without undue hindrance. Given were, such as in the S Shamala case. territories with the onslaught of that lawyers also act as officers of the liberalisation where we will soon see the court when they act for their clients, any The Malaysian Bar welcomes Tan Sri Arifin presence of foreign lawyers in our midst interference with their rights and duties is Zakaria as the new Chief Justice of the practising foreign law. Foreign lawyers an affront to the dignity of the courts and Federal Court, as well as Tan Sri Dato’ already practise foreign law, representing the administration of justice. Seri Md Raus Sharif and Tan Sri Dato’ Malaysian businesses, and they do so in Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin as President of London, Dubai, Singapore or wherever Moving to two completely different the Court of Appeal and Chief Judge of else they or the transaction is based. topics, in September, we bid adieu to Tun Malaya, respectively. Liberalisation of the legal profession is a Dato’ Seri Zaki Tun Azmi as head of the global trend which we must accept and Judiciary. During his tenure, he was able Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria’s judicial qualities, meet the competition head-on instead of to accomplish significant achievements in reputation, seniority and experience make protesting in vain. If at all, foreign lawyers terms of putting into place initiatives to him eminently suited for this important will be a threat to the large- and medium- increase the efficiency of the administration position. We expect that under his judicial sized firms largely in terms of competition of justice. There was pain suffered by leadership, Malaysia’s commitment for recruitment of talent and work; thus Members in the implementation of some to the values enshrined in the Federal the majority of Members of the Bar will of these mechanisms, but his open- Constitution, as well as the cause of justice not be affected by the entry of foreign minded approach facilitated the efforts and the rule of law, will be strengthened. lawyers. The large- and medium-sized to resolve the complaints of the Bar. He The Bar looks to Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria to firms have no choice but to rise to the also instilled a new culture of hard work seize the opportunities which will soon challenge. It will be a condition of entry and discipline among judges, and a culture present itself for judicial constitutional of foreign lawyers that they grow the of consultation between the Bar and the reforms. income pie of the legal profession and not Bench. We thank Tun Dato’ Seri Zaki Tun redistribute it to themselves. Bar Council Azmi for his leadership and for leaving an We are confident that, with these three had a series of talks with Members and improved Judiciary; the efforts of which appointments, the agenda for reform of the majority of Members welcome or are are documented in the World Bank Report the Judiciary undertaken by Tun Dato’ prepared to meet the competition. I am dated August 2011 entitled “Malaysia: Seri Zaki Tun Azmi will continue in the confident that the presence of foreign Court Backlog and Delay Reduction interests of the nation. We are hopeful lawyers will benefit the profession and the Program: A Progress Report”. that there will be more appointments nation. and promotions of judges from the Bar, There were, however, a few missed which will add to the current depth and Lim Chee Wee opportunities during Tun Dato’ Seri Zaki breadth of the Judiciary, and we urge that President Tun Azmi’s term. More could have been improvements to the quality of judgments Malaysian Bar done for judicial constitutional reforms, be initiated. where certain legal lacunae could have 17 Oct 2011

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 3 Readers’ Comments

Thank you very much, I was glad to get it [Praxis]. It is a terrific and interesting read.

I took the liberty of copying Chee Wee’s column to the International Relations/Law Committee at the Queensland Law Society [where LAWASIA is located]. It had recently been discussing developments in Malaysia and the role played by the Bar.

In my view, Chee Wee’s column illustrated so clearly and succinctly to Australian colleagues the range and complexity of issues that their counterparts in Malaysia must deal with, playing such a vital role not just in the legal arena but in the shape of Malaysian society in general. It is quite inspirational. I can only say “Malaysian Bar rocks!” which may not sound very professional but is undoubtedly true.

It is such a welcome and delight to see the revival of Praxis in hard copy version in 2011 after Janet Neville a silence of 2 years. Many of us admit that we still prefer to read books, magazines and other CEO/Secretary-General materials in the old fashion way. A big round of applause to Puan Syamsuriatina and to the Editorial LAWASIA Team for their hard work and for the the [sic] good articles especially from the young lawyers. Brisbane, Australia The new version of Praxis also introduces the section dedicated to the State Bar which is indeed a good effort. Being a member of the Bar who had practised in other states, I for one am glad that the section on the State Bars keep us all informed of the interesting activities carried out in the respective states and it goes to show that those members of the Bar who are practising outstation are thus not forgotten. I especially like the article and lovely pictures in the Lifestyle on Karen Cheah: What is it about cupcakes. Hope that you will have more stories like this on our members of the Bar and their hobbies. Being one who enjoys cooking and baking and I truly agree that cooking and baking takes us away from our hectic life as a lawyer. It is a form of therapy and also a way to spend quality time with our children and family members besides enjoying our homecooked dishes and cakes. Hope to see more interesting articles like this in the future issues.

Well Done for the Great Work!!!

Kiranjit Kaur Messrs A Rahim & Co Kuala Lumpur

the public wants the project in the first place. The public should have had a prior right to choose. Consult the public before implementation of hazardous projects The Bukit Merah incident in the 1980s acts as a grim reminder that the government may not always make the right decision for the Recently, the controversy surrounding the setting-up of a giant public. The victims who have passed on remain as silent statistics of rare-earth processing plant by Lynas Corp in the industrial area of unusually high death rates. The surviving victims, especially those Gebeng, Kuantan, Pahang clearly illustrates a lack (or absence) of of congenital birth defects, carry on the deadly legacy. If 80,000 consideration of the welfare of the public. drums of radioactive waste currently kept at a dump in the Kledang range multiplied by a half life of 14 billion years is akin to an eternal Though siting and construction licenses have been granted by the damage to all forms of life, imagine production at Gebeng which is Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) a few years earlier, the public projected to be ten times more than that at Bukit Merah. was not consulted before the implementation of such a hazardous project which could affect the people’s health and safety (perhaps Perhaps it is time our judiciary, with its powers of judicial review, even life). explore a wider definition of the right to life and right to property under the Federal Constitution to encapsulate such a duty to consult No doubt, under the Atomic Energy Licensing Act 1984, the AELB is on the AELB. not expressly under a duty to consult the public before granting the requisite licenses. Since processing rare earth is a risky venture with apparently everlasting catastrophic effects, the critical question becomes But that does not mean our government cannot embrace procedural whether this risk, balanced against the economic gains, if any, is fairness and transparency. The public deserves to be informed and worth taking. Ultimately it is the public, the biggest stakeholder, consulted BEFORE, not AFTER implementation of such a hazardous who should choose, not the handful few sitting on the board of the project to avoid damage to all the stakeholders, including the administrative offices. operators of the plant who would be expanding much capital. Instead of making efforts to consult the public, there has been an Hence, if the government is genuinely concerned about the welfare enthusiastic effort to try to convince the public that the plant will of the public, please give the public a chance. Ask first and let them be safe. decide. It doesn’t take a nuclear scientist to figure out a formula. The answer is very obvious. Following public outcry, the government suspended the approval of the operating license and called for an international panel to review Kevin Kam the safety of the plant. Unfortunately, this review merely serves a Messrs Larry & Kevin post-implementation purpose. By not consulting the public before Kuantan, Pahang hand, the government has completely missed the point because the issue is no longer about whether it can be deemed safe but whether

4 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Editorial

From the Editor’s Keyboard ...

There is a stirring in the air and a buzz of anticipation. Every It is with this in mind that I have chosen contender is keen to show their prowess… It’s approaching the theme “The Way Forward” for this election time again, and all citizens who know their rights realize end of year issue of Praxis, in tribute that it is their privilege and in fact duty to vote for their elected to the courage of our Bar heroes past, representatives. present and future.

Admittedly, voting can sometimes be a daunting task. Especially To complement this theme I have chosen a beautiful picture taken when we don’t really know our candidates too well. Do we at the celebration of the World Indigenous Day held at the Bar vote merely for what they seem to represent? Do we vote for Council Auditorium recently to highlight the hallmark contribution them because they are a familiar name? What with philosophies of the Malaysian Bar, to give back to society, the impoverished, and alliances too easily changed midstream nowadays, voting is uninformed and legally unrepresented, which includes the Orang undoubtedly puzzling for the uninitiated. Asli, our very own indigenous folk.

And I’m not just talking about our Parliamentary choices either. For this issue, the Editorial team has put together a collection of Let me remind you that candidates vying for your vote would articles to appeal to our readers’ intellect and passion for the law. also come from a smaller pool of acquaintances nearer to your To remind Members of an important service made available by the surroundings, namely your elected Bar Representatives, that Bar Council, we present an Introduction to the Bar Council Library discuss, argue and determine your rights and serve you as Legal as written by our very own librarian, Dr Pathma. Professionals in Peninsula Malaysia as the governing body of the Malaysian Bar, the Bar Council. The Events section features the many events held by the Bar Council this past quarter, including a forum to address the Some of you may have already received the Ballot papers listing interests of Small Firms on 29 July 2011; a celebration of World names of lawyers hoping to serve you in the Council. But, that’s Indigenous Day on 13 Aug 2011; a meeting of three legal minds just the point isn’t it? They are there to serve you, the interests – the Malaysian Bar Council, the Sabah Law Association (SLA) of rest of the Legal Profession and the interests of the public at and Advocates’ Association of Sarawak (AAS) on 15 Sep and large on matters pertaining to law of the land, the adminstration the Tripartite Games 2011 held in conjunction with it; and the of justice and legislative reform. So, in choosing as little as one or resounding success of the 5th China-ASEAN Forum on Legal up to twelve candidates, a Bar Member putting his tick across the Cooperation and Development (CAFTA) on 26-27 Sep 2011. Ballot paper should choose wisely for the one(s) keen, able and capable to serve them, and certainly not those who clearly lack We hope this issue of Praxis will have you proudly reading in the the will to walk what they talk. corridors of the Courts and your legal offices.

In facing the challenging times ahead, it is clear that the arena On behalf of the Editorial team, I bid our readers a Happy that the Bar Council and the Malaysian Bar finds itself thrust into Deepavali, Salam Aidiladha, Happy Christmas and a resoundingly is becoming more and more myriad and requiring of extreme Happy New Year! bravado. The trick of participating in the elections is selecting those within whom this spoonful of courage resides. Syamsuriatina Ishak Editor For all those who care even a smidgeon, I humbly remind that 18 Oct 2011 a simple tick of the pen will suffice to proclaim – Yes, I want to vote for a better Bar!

Dear Readers,

We are pleased to invite any comments regarding our content. All comments may be sent via email to [email protected] by 30 Nov 2011. The best few will be printed in our “Readers’ Comments” section, wherein our favourite amongst them will also receive a free copy of the book reviewed in the “Book Review” section of each Praxis issue commented upon. For this issue, the book up for grabs is “Creating Value From Technology Innovation”. For this purpose, please provide your details — name, law firm name and address, telephone number and email address. While we shall only identify printed comments by name, firm name and state, comments that omit providing full details will be disqualified from reproduction. Happy writing!

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 5 www.bac.edu.my Institute of Legal Executives (ILEX)

ILEX DIPLOMA FOR LEGAL SECRETARIES AND PARALEGALS IALS YOUR CRED ENT The ILEX Diploma for Legal Secretaries and Paralegals are specialized AUGMENT E AD OF THE GAM AND S TAY AH E The Diplomas are designed for secretaries, assistants or for any law

Areas of study include:

The ILEX Diploma for Legal Secretaries and Paralegals ensures that • Legal Word Processing and Audio Transcription

departments through the familiarity with legal terminology, basic • Business Skills in the Legal Environment • Legal Information Processing and management skills, litigation and paralegal essentials. • Administrative Aspects of the Litigation Process The ILEX Diplomas are unique because they bypass the common • The Legal Environment route associated with traditional 2-year colleges, technical training centers or even private career schools; the Diplomas are concentrated • Principles of Liability and precise in content and relevance to the legal industry and to the • And many more ..... career aspirations of secretaries, assistants, practicing lawyers and even fresh law graduates.

50470 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel +60322744165 Fax +60322744174 email: [email protected] CALL 1-800-888-LAW(529) TODAY! Features/Articles

Is Judicial Independence Now Constitutionally Extinct? by Richard Foo1 and photo by Faizol Hardi

A dangerous idea has crept into our 1. The 1988 amendment Kok Wah Kuan decided that, as a result, understanding of the Malaysian Constitution. the constitutional “judicial power of the While the Prime Minister continues to publicly The amendment is shown as follows, with Federation” no longer vested in those assert the government’s commitment to judicial deletions struck through and insertions courts. Instead, their power (ie their ability independence,2 the government is also at the underlined: to function as courts of law) was now solely same time suggesting that an independent (1) Subject to Clause (2) the judicial determined by statutory “jurisdiction and judiciary is not a constitutional requirement power of the Federation shall be powers”. In arriving at this conclusion, the in Malaysia. It now appears to argue that vested in There shall be two High Court also decided that the separation of the Constitution does not even establish or Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction and powers doctrine was not “an integral part” prescribe an independent judiciary. status, namely — of the Constitution, but rather, “we have (a) ... the High Court in Malaya …; our own model”. When a United Nations report recently and charged that “The country does not have (b) ... the High Court in Borneo …; So, we have to explore following questions: a solid, fully independent judiciary based on and such inferior courts as may be 1. Is the separation of powers doctrine the principle of separation of powers and provided by federal law; and the High really not incorporated within the composed of independent and impartial Courts and inferior courts shall have Constitution? Exactly how does our 3 judges and magistrates”, Malaysia responded, such jurisdiction and powers as may Constitution organise the powers of not by insisting or demonstrating that the be conferred by or under federal law. government? Malaysian judiciary was indeed independent, 2. What precisely is “the judicial but by saying: (1A) The courts referred to in Clause (1) power of the Federation”? After shall have no jurisdiction in respect of the 1988 amendment, is it really no the Malaysian Constitution does not fully any matter within the jurisdiction of longer vested in the courts? Is the subscribe to the separation of powers doctrine the Syariah courts.8 courts’ power now solely defined by — “Malaysia has its own model”; and “jurisdiction and powers” decided by (2) The following jurisdiction shall be since the 1988 amendment to article Parliament? 121(1) of the Constitution, it has become vested in There shall be a court which 3. What does “jurisdiction and powers” clearer that the courts have always only shall be known as the Mahkamah 9 really mean? And if Parliament can ever had such “jurisdiction and powers” Agung (Supreme Court) … and decide the courts’ “jurisdiction which are conferred by federal law enacted the Supreme Court shall have the and powers”, does that mean that by Parliament.4 following jurisdiction, that is to say: (a) exclusive jurisdiction to determine the courts are not a separate and independent branch of government? The clear implication is that the judiciary in appeals from decisions of a High the Malaysian model is not constitutionally Court or a judge thereof …; separate but is subject to Parliament (where (b) such original or consultative 2. The Kok Wah Kuan Case of course the government holds power). jurisdiction as is specified in In this way, the government insinuates Articles 128 and 130; and In this case, a child was convicted of murder. that the Malaysian Constitution does not (c) such other jurisdiction as may However, section 97(2) of the Child Act require the judiciary to be independent. So, be conferred by or under federal 2001 required the High Court to sentence Malaysia cannot be criticised for not having law. the child not to death but “to be detained an independent judiciary! … during the pleasure of” the Agong. On The heart of the problem is in Clause (1) appeal, the Court of Appeal10 held that: This disingenuous argument was picked where the amendment: 1. despite the 1988 amendment, “the from Public Prosecutor v Kok Wah Kuan5 1. deleted words which expressly vested judicial power of the Federation” where the Federal Court had construed the “the judicial power of the Federation” remained vested exclusively in the 1988 amendment to article 121(1).6 That (the “vesting formula”); courts; 2. replaced them with “There shall be”; amendment had festered in the Constitution 2. the power to decide the measure of and for almost 20 years, before “the judicial a punishment (ie the duration of the 3. inserted the new “jurisdiction and power of the Federation” was finally dealt detention) was a judicial power; a wrongful death by Kok Wah Kuan. This powers” provision at the end. article analyses the reasoning in that decision and the government’s argument.7 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 7 Features/Articles

3. since the Agong must act on elements may be said to have been power anywhere else. Even the government ministerial advice, section 97(2) had incorporated, but only if and insofar refers to “the three branches of the Malaysian given a judicial power to the executive as they have been re‑enacted in or system”.20 This basic tripartite structure is government; as some “specific provision” within enough to decide that the doctrine is in fact the “four walls” of the Constitution. incorporated in the Constitution. 4. this violated the separation of powers (This then supposedly gives us “our doctrine which was “an integral part” own model” of separation of powers.) Then, the constitutional text will decide of the Constitution; and whether the incorporated doctrine has a 5. Hence, section 97(2) would be form which departs in any way from the 5. consequently, section 97(2) was unconstitutional only if it were “pure” doctrine.21 For instance, the text unconstitutional and void to that inconsistent with some such may require ministers to be also members extent. “provision” in the Constitution, but of the legislature.22 If so, then this required not if it were only inconsistent with “mixture” between the executive and the The Federal Court reversed the Court of the general doctrine (which, on legislative branches has modified the doctrine, Appeal’s decision. However, it is submitted, this reasoning, remains outside the as incorporated. On the other hand, there none of its grounds can be justified. Constitution). may be nothing in the text which requires the judicature to “mix” in any way with the Richard Malanjum CJSS held section 97(2) was 6. After the 1988 amendment, there is other branches. If so, then, in this aspect, valid because it was still the court exercising no longer any “provision” in article the “pure” doctrine would continue to a judicial power when sentencing a child to 121(1) that “the judicial power of operate within the incorporated form to unlimited detention.11 But the problem was the Federation shall be vested in” maintain a strict separation of the judicature. not the court’s sentencing power. The real those courts. There is simply no In this way, the text modifies the doctrine, problem was the Agong’s power to decide “provision” there for section 97(2) as incorporated, to take on the distinctively the duration of that detention. to be inconsistent with. Therefore, Westminster form of separation — a limited section 97(2) is valid. “mixture” between the legislative and the Nevertheless, Richard Malanjum CJSS strongly executive branches, leaving intact a strict denied that, after the amendment, the 3. Is the separation doctrine separation of the judicature from both those courts’ functions were solely constrained incorporated? If yes, how? branches. Both Tun Suffian and Professor by federal law under article 121(1). In his HP Lee have discerned this form within the view, article 121(1) was not “the whole and We must first resolve these basic questions Constitution.23 sole repository” of the judicial power,12 ie before considering the effect (if any) of the he thought the courts had other sources 1988 amendment. The basic Westminster form of separation of power besides article 121(1). This also may be modified even further by the text of cannot be correct because where there is a The majority reasoning above is fundamentally the particular constitution. We must always written constitution, the legislature, executive flawed because it fails to appreciate an construe the text within the “four walls” on and judicature must ultimately “take their important distinction. In a Westminster‑model its own terms to determine whether, and to powers directly or indirectly from it”.13 constitution, (a) the fact of the doctrine’s what extent, the incorporated doctrine has incorporation is proved by a tripartite departed from the “pure” doctrine. Only The other judges14 also upheld section 97(2), constitutional structure; but (b) the form “very explicit and unmistakable words” but on a different reasoning which may be of the incorporated doctrine is determined within the text will justify any particular articulated as follows:15 by the constitutional text. departure.24 The final form derived in this 1. A separation of powers is “a political way, not the Kok Wah Kuan way, is the doctrine under which the legislative, 3.1 The Settled Law true “our own model”. executive and judicial branches of government are kept distinct”. Decisions of the Privy Council and the High That is the settled understanding of the Court of Australia have long settled that, separation doctrine within a Westminster‑model 2. Since the Constitution has no strict or although it does not subscribe to a “pure” constitution. Once it is established that “pure” separation of powers, there separation of powers, a Westminster‑model a constitution has the basic tripartite is no wholesale incorporation of the constitution can and does in fact incorporate structure showing that the doctrine is in fact doctrine. It is not “an integral part” the separation doctrine.17 If a constitution incorporated, then all its principles will apply of the Constitution. shows a basic tripartite structure — three with force of constitutional law as “an integral branches of government having three different part” of the constitution — unless in some 3. Whether or not any particular functions of government — then this itself specific instance, on a proper construction of element of the doctrine may have sufficiently proves that the doctrine is in the text, the application of some particular been incorporated depends on its fact incorporated. The Constitution clearly principle must be excluded or modified so acceptance by the Constitution. has this tripartite structure.18 A certain that there is no inconsistency with the text. constitutional power “shall be vested” in All its principles are always included unless 4. Applying the “four walls” principle,16 a certain constitutional organ.19 This is “explicitly” and “unmistakably” excluded by this acceptance is piecemeal. In a mandatory exclusive vesting because it the text, thus producing the final form of specific instances, particular implicitly prohibits the vesting of the same the doctrine as incorporated.

8 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

all the Constitution ever had was “our own model” of separation made up of “specific provisions” only. A poor distorted counterfeit has ejected a profound doctrine from Malaysian constitutional understanding!

The “settled law” reasoning, however, enables us to correctly conclude, consistently with all received legal wisdom before Kok Wah Kuan, that the Constitution in fact fundamentally incorporates the separation doctrine in its basic tripartite structure, and that its discerned Westminster form of separation prescribes a strict separation of the judicature.27

But now, we have to consider whether the 1988 amendment has made any difference to that position.

4. Can the 1988 amendment make any difference?

Recall that the amended article 121(1) deleted the vesting formula (replacing it with “There shall be”) and inserted the “jurisdiction and powers” provision at the This approach not only gives ultimate primacy tripartite structure, without requiring end. Has this change in the text of article to the text within the “four walls” but also a “pure” form of separation. 121(1) actually changed the Westminster reconciles perfectly with the Constitution’s form of separation originally discerned in undeniable Westminster origins and character. 2. Instead, the Court relied on the “four the Constitution? Specifically: walls” principle to conclude that 1. Has it abolished the exclusive 3.2 The Kok Wah Kuan Approach since “the doctrine is not a provision vesting of “the judicial power of the [within the “four walls”] of the Federation” in the courts? Kok Wah Kuan, however, decided that Malaysian Constitution”, it must be the doctrine’s principles must be always extraneous. This was a wrong test 2. Has it abolished or compromised the excluded unless expressly included in “specific because the “four walls” principle strict separation of the judicature? provisions”. This was not because there cannot always tell us whether the was something unique in the Constitution doctrine is in fact incorporated. The answer to both questions is “No”, for which required the Court to shape Malaysia’s Again, the “settled law” would have the following reasons. constitutional law differently. The issues before disclosed that the text within the the Court were basic to all Westminster‑model “four walls” can only tell us about the 4.1 Replacing the vesting formula constitutions, and had long been settled as form of separation created, after the with “There shall be” described above. basic tripartite structure has proved the fact of separation. The “four This substitution makes no difference But the Court declined to discuss decisions walls” principle rightly demands that whatsoever because, actually, these are 25 from other jurisdictions. So, it came to its we must always interpret the text and merely different drafting styles which are decision in its own wisdom, uninformed by give primacy to the text. It focuses used to achieve the same result.28 The “There the “settled law”. This decision, however, on interpreting text. However, the shall be” formula — which establishes the cannot withstand analysis. fact of the doctrine’s incorporation courts — is just as effective as the vesting is to be found not in the text but in formula in creating the tripartite structure 1. The Court questioned how the structure. Kok Wah Kuan used with the three powers exclusively vested in the doctrine could possibly be the wrong test, looked in the wrong the three organs. Because the separation incorporated when the Constitution place, and so, could not find the doctrine is essentially a division of powers to did not exhibit the “pure” form of doctrine which was there all along. corresponding organs, the very establishment separation. This question of course of an organ implicitly vests its power too.29 had already been answered by the Clearly, Kok Wah Kuan’s reasoning is defective. The express vesting formula may have been “settled law” — there is a distinction The result is bizarre. Before that decision, it textually deleted, but now the amended article between the fact and the form had always been accepted that the separation 121 implicitly vests “the judicial power of of separation; and the fact of the doctrine was fundamentally “embodied” in the Federation” in the same Courts. doctrine’s incorporation is sufficiently the Constitution.26 Now, Kok Wah Kuan says proved by the Constitution’s basic the doctrine was never truly incorporated, and

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 9 Features/Articles

In 1957, the Reid Commission had originally The Federal Court did not realise this difference, 4.2.2 The New Drafting Scheme used the “There shall be” formula in their and wrongly thought that “jurisdiction and draft Constitution, but the UK parliamentary powers” had replaced the deleted “judicial Secondly, because the Court did not draftsman who reviewed the draft changed power of the Federation” to become the sole appreciate the meaning of “jurisdiction” and this to the vesting formula instead,30 purely determinant of the courts’ power. There “powers”, not surprisingly, it also completely “for purposes of clarity”.31 Just as the 1957 are two reasons why this error occurred. misunderstood the purpose of the “jurisdiction change in formula made no constitutional and powers” provision inserted at the end difference,32 so the 1988 reversal also made 4.2.1 Meaning of “jurisdiction” and of Clause (1). The Court considered this no difference. “powers” provision in the context of Clause (1) only, not realising that it was actually part of the In fact, since the fact of separation of powers Firstly, the Court did not ascertain the correct new drafting scheme covering both Clauses depends on structure and not text, an exclusive meaning of “jurisdiction” and “powers”.36 (1) and (2).38 After the amendment, those vesting of power can occur even if there are 1. “Jurisdiction” actually denotes the Clauses have acquired a common style: no vesting or establishing words. So long types of subject matter which a court 1. First, a Clause establishes — “There as the constitution shows the basic tripartite is authorised to deal with. shall be” — a particular court (or structure, it is accepted that the constitution group of courts). incorporates a separation of powers, and 2. “Powers” denotes the specific actions therefore, each constitutional power is which a court is authorised to take 2. Then it says that the court (or exclusively vested in each constitutional when dealing with matters within its group of courts) “shall have” a organ.33 “jurisdiction”. certain “jurisdiction and powers” or “jurisdiction”. 4.2 Inserting the new “jurisdiction Obviously, a court’s “power” in this narrow, and powers” provision specific sense is different from “the judicial So we see that Clause (1) establishes the High power of the Federation” which is the Courts and the inferior courts, and then says This insertion also cannot abolish the judicature’s basic constitutional power. that they shall have such “jurisdiction and exclusive vesting of “the judicial power of the So, in Kok Wah Kuan: powers” as may be set by using federal law. Federation” in the courts or modify the strict 1. A criminal trial, being judicial in Similarly, Clause (2) establishes the Supreme separation of the judicature. The two concepts character, was an exercise of “the Court, and then says that it shall have such serve very different (but complementary) judicial power of the Federation”. “jurisdiction” as stated in paragraphs (a) purposes within the Constitution. One Therefore, only the judicature (and and (b) of Clause (2) itself, and also any cannot replace the other. not the legislature or the executive) other “jurisdiction” as may be set by using could conduct such a trial. federal law.39 Together, the two Clauses 1. “The judicial power of the encompassed the whole judicial hierarchy Federation” characterises the 2. Then, within the judicature, only a in 1988. judicature’s basic constitutional High Court (and not eg a Magistrate’s power within the tripartite separation Court) had the “jurisdiction” to try a Taking Clause (1) in isolation, the Federal of powers. It differentiates the murder charge. Court mistakenly thought that statutory judicial constitutional power from the 3. But the High Court had no “power” “jurisdiction and powers” had replaced “the legislative and executive constitutional to sentence a child to death; only the judicial power of the Federation” to become powers of the sovereign state.34 If a “power” to sentence him to unlimited the sole determinant of the courts’ power, governmental task exercises power detention. simply because one had been inserted and which is judicial in character, then the other deleted. But the larger context that power is actually part of “the 4. The real issue was whether the of Clauses (1) and (2) makes it clear that, judicial power of the Federation” and executive could later (after the court in fact, the new “jurisdiction and powers” the task must be performed (if at all) had sentenced the child) exercise a provision in Clause (1) is merely part of an by the judicature and not the other different power which would then overall new drafting scheme which seeks to branches. decide the duration of the detention. expressly give each court within the hierarchy If this other power is also “judicial” in its own individual sphere of operation. 2. In contrast, “jurisdiction and powers” character — and it has been so held37 allocates or distributes the judicature’s — then it also forms part of “the When it says “... and the High Courts and basic constitutional power within judicial power of the Federation”. inferior courts shall have such jurisdiction the judicature. It differentiates that Since “the judicial power of the and powers as may be conferred by or under portion of “the judicial power of the Federation” remains exclusively federal law”, it is merely expressly authorising Federation” exercisable by any one vested in the article 121 courts even the use of federal law to set for each and particular court, especially within a after the 1988 amendment, section every one of those courts its own individual hierarchy.35 A court may exercise 97(2) cannot validly give this power “jurisdiction and powers” — what subject “the judicial power of the Federation” to the executive. matters each court is authorised to deal with only within its lawful “jurisdiction and and what specific actions it is authorised powers”. to take.

10 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

Clause (1) established “the High Courts and courts. But even then, the Ninth Schedule The judicature remains constitutionally inferior courts” as a group, and then requires already empowered Parliament to enact independent because its independence federal law to give different “jurisdiction federal law for the “Jurisdiction and powers does not depend on how “jurisdiction and and powers” to each of those courts within of all [courts other than Syariah Courts]”.45 powers” is distributed or what “jurisdiction the group. Parliament’s power to legislate in order to and powers” a court has or does not have. distribute “jurisdiction and powers” was Its independence is more fundamentally 1. Federal law must give each Clause already there. Such federal law already grounded in: (1) court its own “jurisdiction and existed.46 1. the fact of separation of powers powers” which will differentiate it within the Constitution, which from the other Clause (1) courts. So, All the amendment has done is to give Clauses has established the judicature as federal law gives different territorial (1) and (2) a new drafting style which works a separate branch and invested it “jurisdictions” to the two High in tandem with the Ninth Schedule. On with its own exclusive constitutional Courts,40 and different “jurisdiction the one hand, each Clause now expressly power; and and powers” respectively to a High contemplates the use of federal law to set Court,41 a Sessions Court42 and a individual “jurisdiction and powers” (or 2. the Westminster form of separation Magistrate’s Court.43 “jurisdiction”) and on the other, the Ninth within the Constitution which, even Schedule remains the substantive provision after the 1988 amendment, still 2. In doing so, federal law will also have which gives Parliament the general power maintains a strict separation of the differentiated those Clause (1) courts to enact such federal law. judicature. As we saw, the amended from the Supreme Court in Clause article 121 text has done nothing to 4.2.4 “Jurisdiction and powers” “mix” the judicature, its functions (2).44 cannot affect independence or its membership51 with the other So, if we apply the correct meaning of branches in any way. Certainly, Parliament has always set the “jurisdiction” and “powers”, and appreciate “jurisdiction and powers” of the article 121(1) the new drafting scheme, then it is clear that Therefore, any court, acting within whatever courts.47 But again, if we apply the correct the true purpose of the inserted provision lawful “jurisdiction and powers” it has, is meaning of “jurisdiction” and “powers”, we is only to distribute “the judicial power of always separate from and independent of will see that, although Parliament may set the Federation” among the High Courts and the legislative and executive branches. the “jurisdiction and powers” of individual inferior courts within Clause (1) according to courts, the whole judicature is nonetheless different individual “jurisdiction and powers”. 5. Refuting the government’s constitutionally separate from and independent It does no more than that. argument of the other branches. It is not some new basis of conferring the So, the fact that there is no “pure” Obviously, when a hierarchy exists, there must judicature’s power, which Kok Wah Kuan separation of powers does not mean that exist some mechanism to allocate “jurisdiction took it to be, when it held that “the judicial the separation doctrine is not incorporated. and powers” to the different courts. With power of the Federation” no longer vested The doctrine is in fact incorporated in the inferior courts, this is invariably done by in the courts and instead “jurisdiction and clearly tripartite Constitution, establishing legislation. With superior courts which are powers” legislation now solely conferred three separate branches of government. created by constitution, some “jurisdiction the courts’ power. As we saw, despite the Under its Westminster form of separation, and powers” may be constitutionally deletion of the vesting formula, “the judicial it is the legislature and executive, not the entrenched. But the allocation may also power of the Federation” still confers the judicature, who are “mixed” to a certain be (and is commonly) done by legislation. judicature’s basic constitutional power. The extent. “Malaysia’s own model” of separation We saw all this above.48 “jurisdiction and powers” provision merely of powers actually still prescribes a judicature confers different authorised subject matters which is strictly separate from both the When Parliament enacts such “jurisdiction and specific actions to the different individual legislature and the executive. and powers” legislation, it is merely mediating courts. “Jurisdiction and powers” cannot between the constitutional grant of “the operate alone or instead of “the judicial Secondly, so what if it is true that the judicial power of the Federation” to the whole power of the Federation” to solely determine “jurisdiction and powers” of the article 121(1) judicature and the distribution of that power 52 the courts’ power after the amendment. courts have always been set by Parliament? to the specific courts within the judicature.49 Kok Wah Kuan was wrong to think it could. This is merely a mechanism to set each court’s It provides the distribution mechanism; it is individual sphere of operation. It cannot not the source of the judicature’s power. This 4.2.3 Parliament has always affect the aforesaid fact of separation or is true even if Parliament enacts legislation determined “jurisdiction and form of separation. which limits, erodes or ousts the “jurisdiction powers” and powers” of the courts in certain matters,50 The only critical question was whether the thereby undermining the judicature’s exercise Since that is the true purpose of the inserted text of the amended article 121(1) changed of “the judicial power of the Federation”. provision, it has not added anything new. anything about that form of separation? As Parliament can never become the source Before the 1988 amendment, Clause (1) shown above, nothing in the amendment of the judicature’s power, no matter how itself was silent about the “jurisdiction and removed the courts’ vested exclusive “judicial much it might interfere with that power. powers” of the High Courts and the inferior power of the Federation” or compromised the

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 11 Features/Articles

pre‑existing strict separation of the judicature. between the three powers of the does not affect the hierarchy between So, the Constitution still prescribes (albeit State, as the judiciary is no longer the three branches of the Malaysian now implicitly) that “the judicial power of at the same level as the executive system as there is no such hierarchy or the Federation” shall be exclusively vested in or the legislative. According to the ranking among these three branches. the article 121 courts, and the courts remain authorities, that amendment does constitutionally separate and independent not affect the hierarchy between the 4. In the case of PP v. KOK WAH KUAN as before.53 three branches of the State because [2007] 6 CLJ 341 the Federal Court there is no such hierarchy or ranking held inter alia as follows with regards But the majority judges in Kok Wah Kuan among these branches. According to the doctrine of separation of — instead of holding that the executive is to the authorities, the position and power: not permitted to exercise any part of “the effect of clause 1 of article 121 of the judicial power of the Federation” — have Federal Constitution prior to and after The doctrine of separation of powers gone so far off course as to concede not just the amendment remained the same, is a political doctrine under which (a) the absence of the separation doctrine as both subject the judicial power the legislative, executive and judicial as “an integral part” of the Constitution, of the courts to federal law. The branches of government are kept but also (b) the complete loss of their own jurisdiction and powers of the courts distinct, to prevent abuse of power. constitutional power! It has been called were at all times subjected to federal However, Malaysia has its own “a remarkable act of self‑flagellation”.54 It law. model. Whilst our Constitution does was really more an unwitting suicide. As have the features of the separation if that was not enough, almost two years Appendix 2 of powers, it also contains features later, another bench of the Federal Court55 Observations of the Government of which do not strictly comply with unanimously refused to disturb the original Malaysia on the report of the Working the doctrine. To what extent the decision and allowed it to stand.56 Twice, Group on Arbitrary Detention on its doctrine applies, therefore, depends the Federal Court failed to see that if a visit to Malaysia (7-17 June 2010) on the provisions of the Constitution. separate constitutional judicial power does not exist, then a constitutionally separate Judicial independence 5. In determining the constitutionality and independent judiciary cannot exist. or otherwise of a statute under our 1. In relation to the conclusion made Constitution, it is the provision of Alas, the Federal Court itself has so decided, by the Working Group in Paragraph the Constitution that matters, not a and now the government is only too happy 12 based on amendments made to political theory expounded by some to adopt this clearly wrong decision as stating Clause (1) of Article 121 of the Federal thinkers. The doctrine of separation the true constitutional position. It is a position Constitution, Malaysia wishes to of powers is not a provision of the from which the judiciary cannot extricate inform that according to the legislative Malaysian Constitution. Thus, a itself without the same issues presenting history of Clause (1) of Article 121 of provision of the Constitution cannot themselves again to the Federal Court, and the Federal Constitution, regardless of be struck out on the ground that it one which the government has clearly no the terminology used to refer [to] the contravenes the doctrine. Similarly, intentions of rectifying in Parliament. So, jurisdiction and powers of the courts, no provision of the law may be struck beware, if the government is right in saying the position and effect of Clause (1) of out as unconstitutional if it is not that the Constitution does not prescribe an Article 121 of the Federal Constitution inconsistent with the Constitution, independent judiciary, then it is always only prior [to] and after the amendment to even though it may be inconsistent one small step away from being able to Article 121(1) via Act A704, remains with the doctrine. insist — legally! — that the judiciary must the same as both subject the judicial not be independent. Kok Wah Kuan has power of the courts to Federal law. 1 Faculty of Law, Monash University. come home to roost. In fact, the post amendment position 2 Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib b Tun Haji Abdul Razak, (Speech states the law in clearer terms. delivered on his behalf at the Commonwealth Appendix 1 Magistrates’ and Judges’ Conference 2011, Report of the Working Group on 2. It is to be noted that a shoulder note Royale Chulan Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, 18 July 2011), online Prime Minister’s Office website Arbitrary Detention on its mission to appearing in a legislation, including http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=speech&news_ Malaysia (7-17 June 2010) the Constitution, does not carry any id=505&page=1676&speech_cat=2; also reported special legal meaning. It appears as in The Star, 18 July 2011, Najib: Malaysia committed 12. The country does not have a solid, a reference only and the substantive to ensuring independence of judiciary, online http:// fully independent judiciary based on provision carries the legal intent of thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/7/18/na the principle of separation of powers the legislature. Such is the case with tion/20110718165112&sec=nation. and composed of independent and the phrase “Judicial power of the 3 Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention impartial judges and magistrates. The Federation” as found in the shoulder on its mission to Malaysia (7–17 June 2010), United amendment to clause 1 of article 121 note to Article 121 of the Federal Nations Human Rights Council OR, 16th Sess, Annex, of the Federal Constitution, which Constitution. Agenda Item 3, UN Doc. A/HRC/16/47/Add.2 (2011) eliminated the term “judicial power”, at para 12, online: Office of the High Commissioner seriously affected the hierarchy 3. The amendment to Clause (1) of for Human Rights http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/ doc/UNDOC/GEN/G11/106/38/PDF/G1110638. Article 121 of the Federal Constitution pdf?OpenElement. See Appendix 1 for extract.

12 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

4 Observations of the Government of Malaysia on the 19 Constitution articles 39, 44 [emphasis added]. For exclusively in that Court, since the constitution had report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention the reasoning that the deletion of this vesting formula the tripartite structure. on its visit to Malaysia (7–17 June 2010), United in article 121(1) makes no difference, see below. 34 See Liyanage, supra note 16 at 288; Huddart, Parker Nations Human Rights Council OR, 16th Sess, Annex, 20 Observations, supra note 3 at para 3. & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330 at 357 Agenda Item 3, UN Doc. A/HRC/16/G/8 (2011) at 21 Which strictly requires that (a) the three organs (HCA); Waterside Workers’ Federation of Australia v paras 1–5, online: Office of the High Commissioner must be kept distinct (“separation of agencies”) (b) JW Alexander Ltd (1918) 25 CLR 434 (HCA) at 441. for Human Rights http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/ the function of each organ must be kept distinct 35 See Hinds, supra note 16 at 213; Nicholas v The doc/UNDOC/GEN/G11/116/67/PDF/G1111667. (“separation of functions”) and (c) the membership Queen (1998) 193 CLR 173 at 185–186, 188 (HCA) pdf?OpenElement [Observations]. See Appendix 2 of each organ must be kept distinct (“separation of [Nicholas]. for extract. persons”): see MJC Vile, Constitutionalism and the 36 See especially Lee Lee Cheng v Seow Peng Kwang 5 [2008] 1 MLJ 1, [2007] 6 CLJ 341 (FC) [Kok Wah Separation of Powers, 2nd ed (Indianapolis: Liberty [1960] 1 MLJ 1 (CA). Kuan cited to M.L.J.]. Fund, 1998) at 13–18. 37 See The State (O) v O’Brien [1973] IR 50 (HC and SC); 6 In this article, “1988 amendment” means the 22 See eg Constitution articles 43–43B. Browne v The Queen [2000] 1 AC 45 (PC); Director amendments to article 121 made by section 8 of 23 See Tun Mohamed Suffian, An Introduction to the of Public Prosecutions of Jamaica v Mollison [2003] the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1988 (Act A704): Legal System of Malaysia, 2nd ed (Petaling Jaya: 2 AC 411 (PC). see below. Penerbit Fajar Bakti, 1989) at 43 [Suffian, “Legal 38 And also Clause (1B) when it was later inserted in 7 For a fuller discussion of Kok Wah Kuan, see Richard System”]; HP Lee, “The Judicial Power and Constitutional 1994 to establish the Court of Appeal. Foo, “Malaysia—Death of a Separate Constitutional Government — Convergence and Divergence in the 39 Similarly, the later Clause (1B). Judicial Power” [2010] Sing JLS 227, online: Social Australian and Malaysian Experience” (2005) 32 JMCL 40 See Courts of Judicature Act 1964 section 3. Science Research Network http://papers.ssrn.com/ 1, online: Commonwealth Legal Information Institute 41 See Courts of Judicature Act 1964 part II. sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1802630. http://www.commonlii.org/my/journals/JMCL/2005/1. 42 See Subordinate Courts Act 1948 part VI. 8 This article does not discuss the jurisdictional tension html. 43 See Subordinate Courts Act 1948 part VII. between the article 121(1) courts and the Syariah 24 Wheat Case, supra note 16 at 90 [emphasis added]. 44 And later, also from the Court of Appeal in Clause courts which has resulted from this insertion. It argues 25 Kok Wah Kuan, supra note 4 at para 27. (1B). that, apart from Clause (1A), the 1988 amendment 26 See eg Loh Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia 45 Constitution Ninth Schedule List I paras 4(a)–(b) has no substantive effect. [1977] 2 MLJ 187 at 188 (FC); Fan Yew Teng v [emphasis added]. 9 This court was originally created as the Federal Court Government of Malaysia [1976] 2 MLJ 262 (HC); 46 The same Subordinate Courts Act 1948 and Courts of in 1963, renamed the Supreme Court in 1985: see Phang Chin Hock v Public Prosecutor [1980] 1 MLJ Judicature Act 1964 which were enacted before the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1983 (Act A566); 70 (FC); Lim Kit Siang v Mahathir Mohamad [1987] 1 1988 amendment continued to operate thereafter. and re-constituted as the present Federal Court in MLJ 383 (HC and SC); Rama Chandran v The Industrial 47 Besides, of course, any “inherent jurisdiction [or 1994: see Constitution (Amendment) Act 1994 (Act Court [1997] 1 MLJ 145 (FC) [Rama Chandran]. See powers]” which simply “inheres” from the very nature A885). also Suffian, “Legal System”, supra note 22 at 10, of a court of law. See eg Rama Chandran, supra 10 Kok Wah Kuan v Public Prosecutor [2007] 5 MLJ 13; Tun Mohamed Suffian, An Introduction to the note 24; Pacific Centre Sdn Bhd v United Engineers 174 (Gopal Sri Ram, Zulkefli and Raus Sharif JJCA) Constitution of Malaysia, 2nd ed (Kuala Lumpur: (Malaysia) Bhd [1984] 2 MLJ 143 (HC); Ngan Tuck at paras 4, 6–8, 11–13. Govt. Printer, 1976) at 21–22, 97. Seng v Ngan Yin Groundnut Factory Sdn Bhd [1999] 11 Kok Wah Kuan, supra note 4 at paras 33–34. 27 See text accompanying note 22. 5 MLJ 509 at 520 (HC). 12 Ibid at paras 37–39. 28 Compare eg Commonwealth of Australia Constitution 48 See text accompanying notes 37–42. 13 Sir Ivor Jennings, The Law and the Constitution, 5th sections 1, 61, 71; Constitution of India articles 79, 52, 49 See Nicholas, supra note 34. ed (London: University of London Press, 1960) at 62. 53(1), 124(1); Jamaica (Constitution) Order in Council 50 Assuming, without resolving, that Parliament can (A pre‑eminent constitutional jurist, Jennings was 1962 sections 34, 68(1), 97(1); Ceylon (Constitution) constitutionally do so. of course a member of the Reid Commission which Order in Council 1946 sections 7, 45. 51 See supra note 20. first wrote the Constitution.) See also R v Kirby; Ex 29 See Hinds, supra note 16 at 212, 220, where the 52 It may even be true the 1988 amendment has made parte Boilermakers’ Society of Australia (1956) 94 Jamaican constitution also used the “There shall be” this point clearer in article 121(1) itself. CLR 254 (HCA) at 270 [Boilermakers Case]. formula to establish its courts. The Privy Council 53 Even now, part IX of the Constitution continues to 14 Abdul Hamid Mohamad PCA delivered the joint held that there was a “necessary implication” that contain provisions (regarding the appointment of judgment of himself, Ahmad Fairuz CJ, Alauddin the constitutional judicial power vested exclusively judges, their security of tenure and remuneration, and CJM and Zaki Azmi FCJ. in the courts thereby established. immunities) which are all “designed to maintain the 15 Kok Wah Kuan, supra note 4 at paras 11–18, 27. 30 Compare the Reid draft Constitution articles 36 (read independence of the Judiciary from the executive and 16 See Government of Kelantan v Government of Malaya with 32), 38 and 114: Colonial Office, Report of legislative authorities”: FM Constitutional Proposals, [1963] 1 MLJ 355 at 358 (SC) per Thomson CJ: “the the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission supra note 30 at paras 31, 33. See also Liyanage, Constitution is primarily to be interpreted within its (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1957) at supra note 16 at 287. own four walls … ”. 12–14, 40 with the final draft Constitution articles 54 Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi, The Star, 14 Nov 17 See New South Wales v Commonwealth (1915) 39, 44 and 121: Federation of Malaya Constitutional 2007, Reflecting on the Law: Operating at the 20 CLR 54 at 88–90, 108 (HCA) [Wheat Case]; Re Proposals Annexes (Kuala Lumpur: Govt. Printer, Periphery, online: The Star Online http://thestar. Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257 1957) at 18, 21, 57. com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/2007/11/14/ at 264 [HCA]; Victorian Stevedoring and General 31 Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals columnists/reflectingonthelaw/19450018&sec=Re Contracting Co Pty Ltd v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73 (Kuala Lumpur: Govt Printer, 1957) at para 5 [FM flecting%20On%20The%20Law. at 89–90, 96–97 (HCA); Boilermakers Case, supra Constitutional Proposals]. 55 Comprising Arifin Zakaria CJM, Augustine Paul and note 12 at 275; A–G for Australia v The Queen 32 See UK, HC, Parliamentary Debates, vol 573, col 636 Mohd Ghazali FCJJ. [1957] AC 288 (PC) at 311–315, (1957) 95 CLR (12 July 1957) (Mr Alan Lennox-Boyd, Secretary of 56 An application had been made to this bench to 529 at 537–540; Liyanage v The Queen [1967] 1 State for the Colonies) while moving the Federation review the original decision under Rule 137, Rules of AC 259 at 287–288 (PC) [Liyanage]; Hinds v The of Malaya Independence Bill 1957. the Federal Court 1995. See M Mageswari, The Star, Queen [1977] AC 195 at 212–213 (PC) [Hinds]. 33 See Liyanage, supra note 16 at 286–288, where the 23 July 2009, Youth to be detained at the pleasure 18 Constitution part IV chapter 3, part IV chapter 4, constitution of Ceylon neither established nor vested of the Agong, online: The Star Online http://thestar. part IX. power in the Supreme Court. The Privy Council still com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/7/23/nation/20 held that the constitutional judicial power was vested 090723114635&sec=nation.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 13

Features/Articles

Doing What is Right K C Vohrah’s Speech at the Ethics and Professional Standards Course Luncheon (11 Aug 2011) (This speech is reproduced verbatim)

Ladies and gentlemen, I dedicate this talk to the late YM Raja Aziz, must first be complaints supported by proof and either one or a towering Malaysian, a lawyer of utmost integrity and humility the other is lacking in many cases. one who shunned publicity and public honours and espoused the underdog for a just cause and who contributed immensely to the 5. We know who these notorious people are and they are the ones pursuit of elusive justice; to a brave Bar; to the six Judges who, in who give a bad name to the noble profession. We should be defence of the Judiciary, suffered the indignity and the injustice of wary of them and not imitate them. As was remarked by Lord being judged unfairly; to the heroic lawyers who defended them; and Bolingbroke (this quote is from the article by Mariette Peters to the majority of the Judges who, had by virtue of their having to be “Legal Ethics in the Malaysian Legal Education System Quo silent, continued to dispense justice in accordance with the law and Vadis…? The Asean Law Journal, Vol 4, 2009 at p57) - its best traditions during a shameful period in the Judiciary’s history. … the profession of the law, in its nature the noblest My talk is in three parts, the first on doing what is right by way of and most beneficial to mankind, is in its abuse and ethical behavior at the Bar, the second on doing what is right in court abasement the most sordid and pernicious. and the third part on what lawyers, both of the Bench and the Bar, did right in the late eighties. 6. It is not enough to be good and ethical at the Bar. You also need to give your services to civil society ungrudgingly as well. There PART 1 : Overview of the General Principals of Ethics are so many committees under the Bar Council where you can give your services. 1. We are part of the many, many lawyers in Malaysia. Pre-Legal Profession Act 1976 and Raja Aziz 2. Except for a few bad apples most are good examples of ethical lawyers who do litigation work or non-litigation (whether 7. Let me, for today, take one name in this talk of the person who corporate, conveyancing, trademarks, etc) without resort to exemplifies what a good and ethical lawyer who often gave underhand tactics in their work. pro bono service to civil society ought to be. His name shines very brightly as an example most worthy of emulation, the late 3. These good people, depending on whether they practise as Yang Mulia Raja Aziz Addruse, worthy of emulation at the a one person practice or in partnership, are doing reasonably Bar, worthy of emulation in what he gave to civil society. well, some very well because of their area of specialty and skills, goodwill in the name of the firm or family connections. They all 8. In 1964 Raja Aziz Addruse was in the firm of Fred Arulanandom work hard and they have no need for bad ethics. together with me. He had been in the Attorney General’s office for some years, the favorite officer of the Solicitor General, HS 4. The few bad apples in our midst are actually more than a Ong who later became Judge of the Supreme Court. Not for Raja handful, I assure you, and some of them have faced disciplinary Aziz, however, the constrictive space of public office. He needed action. Some are notorious for their unethical practices. And to be free in his thinking. Our master, the late Arulanandom, they appear to be untouchable. Not because the Bar Council became Judge of the High Court some years later. In his firm is not doing its work on taking disciplinary proceedings. There we learned the practical aspects of law and the strict ethical

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 15 Features/Articles

standards that would be needed of a lawyer. The firm was in the must not abuse the confidence reposed in you and you must lovely and quiet town of Ipoh. There were then some 70 to 80 undertake the defence fairly and honourably and you must advocates and solicitors there, some already in semi retirement. disclose all circumstances to your client. And those who were doing their chambers had to prepare for exams under the 1947 Advocates & Solicitors Ordinance before Lawyer-Lawyer Relationship we could be called to the Bar. 15. Now, on your lawyer-to-lawyer relationship. As a former Judge 9. Most of the examiners were those who were in semi retirement, and now in practice, I have noticed lawyers behaving badly when good lawyers steeped in the knowledge of legal ethics and with it comes to dealing with their opponents. I have seen lawyers long experience at the Bar where they saw the breaches of ethics conducting cases in a way merely to facilitate delay (and that amongst their colleague. is a no, no). I have seen some communicating or appearing for a person represented by another lawyer (especially in running 10. Our exams were viva voce exams and touched on the practical down cases) and that is highly unethical. And I have seen lawyers issues of ethics and law subjects, which ranged from criminal making unnecessary and tiresome objections which in a way procedure and civil procedure through the substantive law of shows they are not interested in the justice of the case. And contract, tort and, of course, land law. I have seen lawyers perennially not ready for trial and that is wrong and badly reflects on their competence. 11. Needless to say we feared the viva exams as they were called in those days. The good point about the viva was that questions Duty to Court were posed in situational contexts and we would have a discussion with the examiners and they assessed us on our 16. As officers of the court, it is the duty of every advocate to assist understanding of the principles. the court in coming to a correct decision. You shall therefore maintain a respectful attitude towards the court. I will come The Legal Profession Act 1976 and Rules to that later. As you know, the conduct of an advocate during proceedings is also regulated by the Legal Profession (Practice 12. Perhaps you are luckier now. You don’t have to sit for the viva and Etiquette) Rules 1978 which spell out what you should do and you have courses organised by the Bar to attend for the and not do. You – duration of your pupilage. And you have a host of legislations a) shall supply the court with all relevant information (rule 23); which deal with legal ethics – the Legal Profession Act 1976, the b) shall be ready for trial on the day fixed (rule 24); Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 (P & E Rules), c) shall put before the court any relevant binding decision (rule and the Legal Profession (Publication) Rules. 20); d) shall guard against insulting or annoying questions (rule 13); Duty to Client e) shall NOT practice any deception on the court (rule 13); f) shall NOT refer to facts not proved (rule 19); and 13. In gist, if you choose to go into practice you will have to deal g) shall NOT misquote (rule 21) with the clients of the firm in which you are employed. You have been told to uphold the interests of your client, the interest of 17. The point is you should be like the late Raja Aziz. He was a good justice and dignity of the profession. You are not supposed to lawyer, one of our best, and he was known to be good. But advertise yourself; yet you see that some are blatantly doing it what do people most admire about him? That he was a candid and appearing to get away with it. Don’t be seduced by what and honest lawyer. That he did not mislead his client; his client they do. You shall, while acting with all due courtesy to the would know the flaws in their case because he would point out tribunal which you are appearing, fearlessly uphold the interest to him of the unavailable evidence that might be very crucial, of your client, the interest of justice and dignity of the profession that the client most probably, had, at best, an arguable point of without regard to any unpleasant consequences either to law, or that he had weak witnesses. That he was courteous to yourself or to any other person. his opponent lawyer in court and he did not mislead the person. That, more importantly, he did not suborn any witness, and he 14. In relation to your duty towards clients you should not accept never, never, misled the court. If there was a case against the the brief in specific situations where you know you would be cases he was citing on a principle he would bring that case to embarrassed, or that your professional conduct is likely to be the notice of the court. Judges have always said it was a pleasure impugned, or when it would be difficult to maintain professional having Ungku appear before them. independence, or where you are unable to appear. Of course you

16 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

PART 2 : The Courts and You amongst these are their personalities, their social environment, the economic conditions in which they have been brought up, 18. Let me now deal with court work as many of you will be doing business interests, trends and movements of thought, emotions, litigation. In a court system, you have to deal not only with the psychology and so forth. I think that in the context of Malaysia Magistrate or Judge but with the officials in the Registry, the one has also to factor in the university the Judges had attended interpreters, the court clerks and the registrars. With the officials and in some sense their cultural and religious background. you should be courteous but firm but do not bribe them to get favours. 24. I must stress that most of the observations I will be making are descriptive of experience and are not borne out by a statistical 19. The Rules of the High Court and the Subordinate Court Rules are study and they, I must say, are observations that some of my meant to help smooth procedures – that is the avowed intention former colleagues on the bench had also made and probably – but with the unwitting help of Judges and mostly with the subscribe to even now. inventive help of lawyers, the Rules, many say, have clogged the wheels of justice. Many ask for the revamp of the Rules pointing The Types of Judges to England and Singapore and that apparently will be done soon. Zaki CJ has brought into being a number of changes which are 25. The self evident matters will relate to the nature of the human good but there are some teething problems that have to be being that is before you sitting as Judge – bearing in mind the ironed out but these really deal with the competency of lawyers earlier factors I mentioned to you – either a quiet and patient or judicial officers and may need more time to resolve. man, or a quick tempered impatient man, a talkative man, a man who manages to steal the limelight a lot of times, a very cautious 20. Whether a person is a Judge or Magistrate, a DPP or an advocate man who need re-assurance of the principles argued before him for the plaintiff or for the defendant that person is a human being, and is painstaking in digesting them, a man who is bored and a person with ordinary human needs, a person with ordinary shows it and of course you get the quick one who purports failings. But in the court system the person who is a Magistrate to know all the law that was and what it must be. I think it is or a Judge takes a persona of a different dimension because of the same everywhere in the common law world – idiosyncrasies the office or the role he takes in court. Most weaknesses have abound. Many will exhibit combined characteristics. I would everything to do with not knowing the role the person takes in hasten to add that I am not suggesting that all the Judges court and understanding the transformed persona that he is. will knowingly make incorrect and unjust decisions – they are there to dispense justice and they all know their decisions are Know your Judge appealable. But having said that you must be aware that findings of fact are rarely reversed so it pays that your or your client’s 21. I think I should touch on the role of the decision maker and behavior or lack of a attention has not adversely influenced the the weaknesses of lawyers not understanding fully that person’s Judge to come to such a finding of fact. Of course we can get transformed persona. Perhaps I could share my experience with the dishonest or incompetent Judge everywhere though I would you about counsel appearing before Judges – normally a case imagine and we certainly hope such a person is a rare creature of neither counsel nor Judge knowing or understanding each in our judicial system now. other. I had been on the floor before as advocate or as DPP before taking judicial office. So I think I know a little bit of what 26. You would to have to adjust to the temperament of the Judge. the weaknesses are. One unchanging fact is that the Judge sits I am not in any way suggesting that you be manipulative. More literally on a higher plane and you as counsel will always be important is for you to contain your exasperation and anger. Be talked down to. I would like to suggest to you that although courteous but firm! the Judge has the upper hand you as counsel can mitigate your difficulties if you allow the Judge to learn to trust you as the Quiet and Patient Judge counsel and you in turn understand him as a Judge. But more importantly, it is your duty to make sure he understands you. 27. If he is a quiet and patient man don’t take advantage of him. He will probably be courteous but at the same time he maybe The Realists giving you a lot of leeway to make a fool of yourself. The more you talk the more loopholes you make and the more questions 22. As to how a Judge behaves in court was succinctly defined by our you leave open and unanswered. Be to the point and don’t brow Professor of Jurisprudence, Prof LC Green – whether the Judge beat him – there is a limit to his patience. gets up from the right side of the bed decides the course of trial for the day and woe betide any lawyer who appears before the Quick Tempered Judge Judge who gets up on the wrong side and crosses him! Of course that was an exaggeration but he introduced us to the inchoate 28. If he is quick tempered and impatient – humour him courteously thinking of several American and Scandinavian thinkers, Judge but firmly. Leave the point he does not want you to address him Jerome Frank, Justice Holmes, Karl Llewellyn, Roscoe Pound, on but come back to it later when a situation in an argument or a Kelsen and a whole host of other thinkers commonly called provocative aside that you make causes him to backtrack. There the Realists. Though their thinking is deep the picture is hardly was one famous Judge who was quick tempered and impatient holistic. But there are some thought provoking insights. much to the bane of all lawyers who appeared before him but most of the lawyers managed to get their main argument 23. The realists’ approach is highly empirical. They say that the through despite an initial stonewall put up by the Judge. But decision of Judges is the product of ascertainable factors. Included you know he never threatened contempt proceedings. He would

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 17 Features/Articles

raise his voice, he would ridicule your first argument, he would Appearance and Dress Code in Court interrupt you many a time and if he had probably given you a rough time he would have invited you for a drink in chambers 34. Other self evident matters relate to attendance in court, how later. you dress, how you address the Judge, how you keep pace with the Judge. No Judge likes to been left waiting for a lawyer more Talkative Judge so if the lawyer is a junior one. Be punctual, get a place at the Bar table – pass your name to the court interpreter so that he 29. If you have a talkative Judge let him talk – he is probably on track or she can give the correct spelling of your name to the Judge – and he is merely drawing from his vast previous experience as Indian names are always very difficult to spell and don’t irritate counsel or Judge. Or as a person with human frailty he needs to the Judge by his having to call out to you to spell your name. show off. If he is not on track as shown by what he says you’ll The next thing that the Judge notes about you – if you are in be in a position actually to make preparation to meet the points open court – will be your appearance. Honestly, a man with an he is troubled about and persuade him to change his views or at unshaven face or uncombed hair or an untidy woman would least know you don’t have a chance in actual fact and rightly so. not strike the Judge that the lawyer before him has a tidy mind. The trouble is too much talk might make your mind wander and While a robe frayed at the edges will show a man of seniority make it dull. Better that than making the Judge your enemy for and probably learning wearing a dirty wing collar and crumpled that day. and yellowed wings (bibs) hardly shows a tidy mind.

Judge Always Seeking Limelight 35. Please remember all judges without fail are particular about how you dress. If you appear in chambers again arrive early and be 30. On the other hand you might have grave difficulty in dealing neat in appearance. Don’t use heavy perfume and, make sure with a person who must be almost always in the limelight. I have your coat, blouse or shirt or your person does not exude body heard complaints that in our midst are Judges just like the quick odour. In the confining area of an air-conditioned room not only ones who pontificate and purport to know all the law that was your opponent sitting opposite you but the Judge will have to and what it must be. One story about is about a Judge notorious be hard put to tolerate the oppressive atmosphere which you for his bad temper and tantrums. I wonder if it is possible to bill might not be aware of and you would not want the Judge to your client an extra fee for “pain and suffering”? And perhaps miss a point or two with his thinking how best he can end the another extra fee to buy a blanket and a pillow in case you have proceedings quickly! to spend time out of the office and court in his Majesty’s Hotel! Cheating Dealing with Insults 36. Don’t cheat, don’t lie. You will be surprised how often this 31. You don’t have to take insults from Judges. I think you have to happens – on the sworn facts in the affidavits, in the adduced stand firm in whatever argument you believe in and can support. evidence of witnesses, in submissions. Once found out you are Don’t be intimidated. You give in, you are taken advantage of. If doomed if you appear before the same Judge again and before a Judge is raving and ranting at you, tell him in the coolest voice you know you would be quite well known to other Judges – do not raise your voice – that you don’t understand why he is especially those on the same floor as the affected Judge or to shouting at you – he will deny he is shouting at you but you will Judges who are his close friends. notice his voice will have dropped an octave or two. Calmly tell him in the politest of terms that you would wish to put across 37. Now, you cite case law on a matter that has a rival decision a point which up to now you have not be able to do. Appeal to which you fail to disclose or which you know has been overruled his fairness as a Judge. I have seen and heard about experienced and you learned opponent is not aware of it. If the Judge is and senior lawyers reacting coolly and they get heard or at least diligent who does further research and he discovers what you the Judge backs down from his heckling. have done woe betide you. It is likely you won’t be trusted in future appearances. Some senior lawyers have done that and Written Submissions many Judges are really wary of them.

32. This brings me to the next point. Written submissions are in 38. Then you have the case of the quoting and the reading of a vogue. It is always good to give a written submission – not too passage of a Judge from a case – I am not exaggerating – this brief, not too long – containing all your salient points and the has happened often – relating to the arguments which lead to case law which you should submit to the difficult Judge as part of a principle which you espouse and then stopping short of the your submissions. This is also useful for the Judge who appears opposite view which the Judge in the case cited in fact takes. bored or distracted and does not appear to be taking down Unfortunately a busy Judge does not normally go further than notes. And it is equally useful, especially useful, for the quiet and the quote especially when the quote is highlighted. And the cautious Judge. opposing counsel may be unwary but you know some Judges do read further and when the lawyer is found out of course the 33. Keep your written submission short and simple. Right at the lawyer will make clucking sounds of apology for having misread beginning tell the Judge what you intend to discuss in your the passage. You will be surprised how many lawyers have submission itemising them with sensible captions and then tried that trick, some of them senior and previously respected. I proceeding to elaborate your submission under each caption. remember when I was in the Court of Appeal of being warned Avoid clutter. of certain senior lawyers and you know the Judges became unduly wary of the lawyer when he or someone from his firm

18 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

appears for a case although no deception was practised for that been decided by the court from 1986, JP Berthelsen v DG of particular case and that is a terrible disadvantage to the client Immigration of Malaysia & Ors [1987] 1 MLJ 134, PP v Dato’ whose case is before the Judge. Yap Peng [1987] 2 MLJ 311, Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara v Minister of Home Affairs [1988] 1 MLJ 440, Karpal Singh v Dealing with Appeals Menteri Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri [1988] 1 MLJ 408. These decisions went against the Executive. Then in 1988 in the UEM 39. You could have an appeal from the Subordinate Court to the case of Govt. of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang [1988] 2 MLJ and allied High Court or you could have a case before the Court of Appeal cases the Govt. was irritated by an injunction obtained by Lim Kit or the Federal Court. Siang (it was overturned later). Also to be noted is that Kit Siang had earlier brought contempt proceedings after the Berthelsen 40. You should know that in your appeal your case is not the only case against the Prime Minister of the day for an interview the appeal case before the court. You should know your Judge will PM had given to Time Magazine which was published. Although have to read several appeal files for that day. It is no easy task it was dismissed, the Executive of the day felt the Courts had too being a Judge. The amount of work is tremendous. Most Judges much power. Judicial power of the court was then purportedly bring home files. Most write their judgments at home. There are removed and the courts had such jurisdiction as Parliament gives no real weekends for him to enjoy. So make things easy for him. then by Federal law. This was done through an amendment to Include an English translation of at least the memorandum or Article 121 of the Constitution in 1988. petition of appeal. In the Court of Appeal and Federal Court try to get translations of as many relevant documents especially the 45. I now come to another case where Harun J in the Mohd Noor affidavits and pleadings and do get the judgment, if in Malay, Bin Othman v Mohd Yusof Jaffar [1988] 2 MLJ 129 had held translated into English. I can tell you that most of the judges that UMNO registered under the Societies Act 1966 by virtue of especially those in their 50s read and think in English. Help the existence of a number of unregistered branches had become yourself by helping the an unlawful society. Judge understand the Dr. Mahathir had been case before him. Don’t declared winner of UMNO let the Judge pick up the Bar has to complement the Judiciary in after he won by 43 votes on something which monitoring the independence of the Judiciary against Tengku Razaleigh he has misunderstood for the Presidency of and making it the main and maintaining the public confidence and UMNO. Within a fortnight stay of his judgment. trust in it. of Harun J’s decision Dr. Always give a brief Mahathir announced the written submission in registration of UMNO Baru. clear narrative form – Denning like – in English and avoid clutter. The Plaintiffs (known as UMNO ll) who were allied to Tengku Your affidavits should also avoid clutter. Razaleigh appealed to the Supreme Court. The appeal was fixed to be heard by a full bench of nine Superior Courts Judges on 41. All the while I have been talking about knowing the weaknesses 13 June 1988. What if the Supreme Court were to decide that of a system that you should know. Knowing these weaknesses Justice Harun’s decision was wrong and that UMNO was a lawful will allow you to plan how to appear and take advantage of society? And UMNO Baru had already been registered. procedures properly. 46. In March 1988 the heavy assault on the Judiciary and the 42. Remember Judges are human beings with human frailties and amendment to Article 121 (1) caused Salleh Abbas LP and 20 most do strive to be just though one or two may some suffer Judges in Kuala Lumpur to have a meeting and a written plea on from judgeditis and overreach themselves. So approach all behalf of the Judiciary was made to the Yang Di Pertuan Agong Judges with an understanding of the factors that make them and other Malay Rulers to stop the Executive’s attacks on the what they are and try to do the best for your client. Most of the Judiciary. time, provided you behave, you should have no problem. The Tribunal against Tun Salleh and 2 nd Tribunal against five Other PART 3 : The Malaysian Bar and Defenders of Justice Judges

43. Lastly, may I ask you to be aware of the history of the Malaysia 47. This led to Tun Salleh, the Lord President, being sacked in 1988 Bar and its great members especially from that infamous after the findings of the Tribunal headed by his junior the Chief episode where the Judiciary came under siege and the Federal Judge of the High Court of Malaya, Tan Sri Abdul Hamid, who Constitution amended. It was the Bar (with some exceptions) was at the March meeting of 20 Judges. Shortly after this two that defended the Judiciary. You should recall the names of out of the five Federal Court Judges Wan Sulaiman and George these good people who comprised members of the Bar Council Seah FJJ were sacked on the findings of the 2nd Tribunal chaired and most members of the State Bar Committees. by High Court Judge Dato’ Edgar Joseph who sat in the panel of four other Judges of whom two were junior Malaysian High Berthelsen and Other Cases – Judicial Crisis Court Judges. Incidentally after all the sackings the Superior Court dismissed the UMNO ll appeal and upheld Harun J’s 44. Some 27 years ago in 1986 the Executive perceived that the decision that the UMNO was an unlawful society. independent Judiciary was being difficult to the Executive. The Executive became unhappy over a series of cases that had

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 19 Features/Articles

Heroic Defenders of Tun Salleh and the five Judges 54. You will recognise the men and women who on behalf of their societies had commissioned the Review – the Malaysian 48. While the Judiciary was being assaulted with diatribes from Bar Council (Ambiga as President), LAWASIA (Mah Weng Kwai various sources and the setting up of the 1st the Tribunal against as President), Transparency International (Malaysia) (Executive Salleh Abas followed by the 2nd Tribunal against Wan Sulaiman, Director Richard Yeoh), International Bar Association, Human George Seah, Azmi Hj Kamaruddin, Eusoffe Abdoolcader, Wan Rights Institution (Representative Hj Sulaiman Abdullah). Hamzah FJJ, members of the Bar rose with a strong voice and rallied to assert the independence of the Judiciary; they wore 55. I had remarked that we need to practice ethics in our work and armbands and protest badges “Justice for the Judges” and Save before the courts and in civil society. We also need to know the Seal”. the history of the Bar especially from 20 years ago and before. We need to know how and why the Judiciary was perceived as 49. For the 1st Tribunal against Tun Salleh, Raja Aziz was lead counsel not being independent and lethargic after the episode of the and he appeared with CV Das, P Royan, Zainur Zakaria, Darryl Tribunal and how the perception persisted for more than two C Goon, Tommy Thomas and Varghese George. Anthony Lester decades save for that short period during Dzaiddin CJ’s time. QC was also there for him. I am sure you recognise all the names Hopefully that drive for a better Judiciary brought in by Zaki CJ of these great heroes. will bear fruit for an independent judiciary.

50. For the 2nd Tribunal the another batch of great heroes represented 56. This morning the media carried the heartening words of Zaki the five Judges - CJ stressing the need for the independence of the Judiciary and for the perception that it is so and that the public confidence Wan Sulaiman Wong Chong Wah, Vinayak and trust in the Judiciary should be the main agenda. After Pradhan, Philip TN Koh, stating that public confidence could only be achieved through George Seah RR Sethu and Robert Lazar, an independent and impartial Judiciary which was critical in any Mohd Azmi Hj Kamaruddin Ghazi Ishak, the late Christopher democratic society the CJ continued, Fernando and Arif Yusof, Eusoffe Abdoolcader Cecil Abraham If the actual independence and impartiality of the Wan Hamzah Wilfred Abraham and Loh Siew judiciary are essential to a successful democracy, so is Cheang the public perception that courts must be independent and impartial in resolving disputes and providing basic 51. All counsel from the Bar appearing for the, 1st and 2nd Tribunals protection to individual. rendered yeoman services pro bono. They knew they took risks for themselves and their firms in discharging their professional 57. Needless to say the Bar has to complement the Judiciary in duties. But the independence of the Judiciary was at risk. But monitoring the independence of the Judiciary and maintaining it was a almost foregone conclusion what the outcome of the the public confidence and trust in it. Members of the Bar tribunal would be for Salleh Abas. He was found guilty on all five owe a duty not to impair the independence of and the public charges by his Tribunal. And for the 2nd Tribunal George Seah confidence and trust in the Judiciary as had shamefully taken and Wan Sulaiman were found guilty of the charges preferred place by the unethical and immoral action of a few members against them. of the Bar during the painful period and the Bar must with a positive voice uphold independence of the Judiciary. 52. I must also add that there were many, many lawyers, amongst them Param Cumarasamy, Hendon, to name just a few of KC Vohrah them, who acted heroically, during the ensuing period which 11 Aug 2011 saw the credibility and independence of the Judiciary being eroded notwithstanding the work of the majority of the Judges, Bibliography who because of their judicial office, had to remain silent, but continued to dispense justice in accordance with law and Abbas, Mohd Salleh : May Day for Justice, Magnus Book 1989 impartially. Aziz Addruse, Peter Alderidge : Conduct Unbecoming Walrus 1990 53. I am sure it is of interest to you that in 2008 the Malaysian Bar together with LAWASIA, the International Bar Associations Bar Council : Justice Through Law Human Rights Institution and Transparency International Malaysia commissioned a Panel of 6 Eminent Persons (four of them from Mariette Peters : Legal Ethic’s in the Malaysian Legal Education overseas) to review the 1988 Judicial Crisis. Their admirable System Quo Vadis…? : The Asean Law Journal, Vol 4, 2009 Report of July 26, 2008 completely exonerated Tun Salleh on Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons to Review the 1988 Judicial all the five charges preferred against him by the 1st Tribunal and Crisis in Malaysia, 2008 (Commissioned by the Malaysia Bar, exonerated Wan Sulaiman who had been found guilty on his two LAWASIA, International Bar Associations Human Rights Institution) charges and George Seah on the one charge by the 2nd Tribunal. I commend you to read the Report to understand how the law KC Vohrah Foibles in Court Appearance & Procedures, 23rd March was turned on its head to find the charges proved against these 2004, Royal Lake Club Kuala Lumpur; and three principled men. And it is clear that the three others who suffered for their defence of the Independence of the Judiciary KC Vohrah The Judiciary: What Now? 18th March 2008, Bankers Club, had no reason to be charged. Messrs Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill

20 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 BRO 01808 A3 Injet Printer PRAXIC Lawyer Magazine Concept Ad Trim Size : 21cm(W) x 28cm(H) Bleed Size : 19.5cm(W) x 26.5cm(H) Features/Articles

An Overview of the Bar Council Library by Dr Pathmavathy Satyamoorthy and photos by Ambran Abu Bakar

Introduction

The legal profession is essentially a rule-based discipline where the written law is the primary source. A good law library, therefore, is the lifeline of a legal practitioner as well as his indispensable workshop. The Bar Council Library was set up to fulfil the research and information needs of the practitioner as required by statute under section 42 of the Legal Profession Act 1976. Collection

42. Object and powers of the Bar A comprehensive collection in a library catering to the research and information needs of the legal practitioner should have a (1) The purpose of the Malaysian Bar shall be – good collection of both the primary and secondary sources of law. Primary sources contain the actual law. Secondary sources (f) to establish libraries and to acquire or rent premises to which exclude cases statutes and regulations are materials, which house the libraries and offices of the Malaysian Bar or comment, explain and annotate on the primary sources. amenities for the use of members … The past 10 years or so have seen a gradual increase in the number The Malaysian Bar Library was established in 1979 and housed in of law reports and textbooks and the updating of existing law the then Bar Council Secretariat at Wisma Central, Jalan Ampang, reports and local legislation. The library has a policy of purchasing Kuala Lumpur. all local legal practitioner textbooks and law reports and selected foreign textbooks. The library does not acquire strictly academic In 1984, the library was moved to a separate location in the materials, law school textbooks and foreign legislation, which are Federal Court Building, and in 1987 to the fifth floor of the Straits now freely available online. Trading Building. In 1997, due to the rapid growth of the Bar, the library was again relocated to larger premises on the ground floor The library strives to provide at least one essential current resource of the Loke Yew Building. for each practice area but collection development in certain practice areas is subject to change due to budgetary constraints, When Bar Council purchased its own premises in 2003, the library escalating costs, usage and ongoing collection reassessments. was relocated to the fourth floor of the building at No 15 Leboh Pasar Besar, 50050 Kuala Lumpur where it remains till today. Damage to copies of law reports is a frequent occurrence in a practitioners’ library due to constant photocopying of cases for

22 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

submission to court. These copies have to be constantly replaced. Law Reports However, good replacement copies, especially from the Indian jurisdiction, are very difficult to come by and often the library is The library has over 40 law report titles dating from the 18th forced to return the replacement copies because of poor quality. century to the present from the following foreign jurisdictions: • Australia; Primary sources • Canada; • England; Legislation • India; • New Zealand; and The Federal and State Legislation are continuously being updated • Singapore. as amendments are made by the Malaysian Parliament and the Current local law reports are all held in the library including older law reports, general law reports, specialist law reports and respective State Legislative Assemblies. Apart from the current th Federal and State Laws, the collection also includes older laws Superior Court reports with cases from the 19 century to the such as Laws of the Federated Malay States, Laws of the Straits present. The reports are as follows: Settlements, Laws of Johore, Laws of the State of Kedah, etc, which were donated to the library in 2002 by the late Philip (a) Older Law Reports Hoalim Junior and Miki Goh Wembley Alexandra Saw Beng • William Norton Kyshe’s Cases Heard and Determined in Her (husband and wife) who practised in Penang under Syarikat Goh Majesty’s Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements’ 1808 – Guan Ho. 1884; • JR Innes’ A Short Treatise on Registration of Title in the The index database on Malaysian legislation is constantly updated Federated Malay States, with Reports of Cases under the with annotations as regards dates of coming into force of Acts, Land and Mining Laws from 1907 – 1913; amending Acts, state enactments and subsidiary legislation, • Federated Malay States Law Reports which began publication authoritative text of Acts (whether National Language or English), in 1922; repeal/revocation of legislation, etc. • Straits Settlements Law Reports; • Malayan Union Law Reports 1947; and Current Federal Legislation can be accessed and downloaded for • Johore Law Reports 1915 – 1940. free from the E-Federal Gazette portal on the Attorney General’s Chambers website, http://www.federalgazette.agc.gov.my/, (b) General Law Reports which started gazetting subsidiary legislation, namely the PU(A) • Malayan Law Journal [MLJ] 1932 – current; and PU(B), on 26 Apr 2011 and legislation passed by Parliament • Current Law Journal [CLJ] (launched in 1981 with digest since March 2011 from 2 June 2011. of cases but began reporting full judgments from 1983 – current); and • All Malaysia Reports [AMR] 1992 – current.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 23 Features/Articles

(c) Specialist Law Reports equivalent to the Halsbury’s Laws of England, covering various • Malaysian Labour Law Reports [MLLR] 1968–1972 (published areas of law is useful for searching the current legal position on by the Industrial Court) Malaysian Labour Law Reports a given point of law. [MLLR]/Industrial Law Reports [ILR] 1980 – current (published by Malaysian Current Law Journal); Court Practice Books • Malaysia & Singapore Company and Security Law Cases [MSCLC]; The Court Practice published by LexisNexis in four volumes • Asia Intellectual Property Reports [AIPR] 1991–1995 covering High Court, Subordinate Courts and Appellate Courts (includes reports from Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong and is an aid to practitioners appearing in particular courts. It sets Philippines); out all relevant legislation and rules which govern practice in • Judicial Decisions Affecting Bankers and Financiers edited by courts. They also set out informal rules such as Practice Directions Dato’ Syed Ahmad Idid (1st ed 1994, 2nd ed 2003); which must be followed. A desk edition is also available for quick • Malaysia & Singapore Tax Cases [MSTC] 1991 – current reference. (includes judgments of Privy Council, SC, HC & the Special Commissioners of Income Tax); Digests • The Jernal Hukum 1980 – current (publishes cases decided in the Syariah Courts of the States of Malaysia. It also contains Mallal’s Digest (“MD”), a multi-volume digest summarises local exclusive articles on Islamic law); cases by subject and allows finding of cases on specific issues or • Industrial Law Journal (LexisNexis) [IJN] 2011 – current; topics. As the cases are in summary form, a greater number of • Personal Injury Reports [PIR] 2007 – current; cases can be consulted within a shorter period of time. Apart from • Shariah Law Reports (LexisNexis) [ShLR] 2005 – current; reissues and yearbooks, there is a monthly current service called • Syariah Reports/Laporan Syariah [CLJ(Sya) 2004 – current (by Mallal’s Current Law (“MCL”). This digest was originally published Malaysian Current Law Journal); as Butterworths Law Digest (“BLD”) and later as Mallal’s Monthly • All Malaysia Commercial Reports [AMCR] 2011 – current; and Digest (“MMD”). • Malaysian Consumer Law Journal [My.Consum.LJ] 2011 – current. The library has the foreign equivalent in The Digest: Annotated British, Commonwealth, and European Cases (known as the (d) Superior Courts Reports English Empire Digest until 1981) which commenced in 1919. • Privy Council Cases (PCC) 1875–1990; • Supreme Court Report (SCR) 1986–1996; and Law Dictionaries • Malayan Appeal Cases (MAC) 1995–1998. The library has a good collection of law dictionaries. There are Secondary sources many words and phrases judicially considered which have been introduced into the legal vocabulary. Besides Stroud’s Judicial Annotated Statutes Dictionary published by Sweet & Maxwell, we have the Malaysian version Words, Phrases and Maxims: Legally and Judicially Defined Annotated Statutes of Malaysia published by LexisNexis provides by Dr Anandan Krishnan published by LexisNexis. comprehensive coverage of the most important federal legislation of Malaysia with complete and detailed annotations to Acts and Articles published in the following local law journals are indexed amending legislation with relevant subsidiary legislation, case law, for ease of retrieval: Rules of Court and other authoritative materials. • Law Review (“LR”) by Sweet & Maxwell; • Quarterly Law Review (“QLR”) by Malaysian Current Law Precedents and Forms Journal; • Articles in Malayan Law Journal (“MLJ”); Malaysian Precedents and Forms published by LexisNexis and • Articles in Industrial Law Reports (“ILR”); its foreign equivalent Butterworths Encyclopedia of Forms and • Articles in Syariah Reports/Laporan Syariah [“CLJ(Sya)”]; Precedents contain a variety of precedents to assist in the drafting • Articles in Jernal Hukum; and of legal documents. Precedent books are also available for certain • Articles in INSAF, Infoline and Praxis. special areas of the law. Papers presented in conferences, seminars, etc, participated by, Court Forms or organised by, Bar Council are also indexed.

Atkins Court Forms Malaysia published by LexisNexis and its Loose-leaf Services foreign equivalent the English Atkins Court Forms provide the main procedural documents required for civil proceedings before The library stocks a fairly good collection of loose-leaf services the court. which serve to keep the researcher up to date with new developments in the legal field. These services are regularly Encyclopedic Works updated since the law contained in textbooks may become outdated even before they reach the printers. Some law reports Halsbury’s Laws of Malaysia published by LexisNexis, which is too do come in loose-leaf format, eg MSCLC and MSTC.

24 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

Textbooks Reference and information The library has more than 2,000 practitioner textbooks. These Permitted use As the library is essentially a reference books are catalogued, classified and arranged according to library, all the materials in its collection are subject. The subject dealt with in each book is indicated by alpha for use within the library premises only. numeric code on the spine of the book. All loose-leaf services including law reports eg KPG1314.15 in loose-leaf format, loose copies of updated Acts, current cases in unbound The classification system used is Library of Congress Super K format and the full text databases of cases classification, which is a special adaptation of the main Library of and legislation are only available for use in Congress Classification. the reference room. Enquiries The library entertains inquiries from all Practice Directions/Court Circulars Members of the Bar, whether received in person or via telephone, facsimile, mail or Practice Directions issued by the court are intended to supplement email. the Rules of Court by clarifying the proper practice under the rules Requests for Requests for copies of legislation, cases and and the manner of compliance therewith. copies other information available in the library are faxed, sent by courier service or emailed to An updated compilation of the Practice Directions/Court Circulars Members. relevant to a practitioner is kept in the library. They can also Charges At pre-determined rates. See services and be found in the Malaysian Court Practice and accessed on the charges below. Malaysian Bar Website in the drop down menu under Laws. New Practice Directions are circulated via email to all Members of the Mode of Legal firms or Members may leave a Bar. payment refundable deposit of RM200 with the library, from which the costs incurred will be deducted. Bar Council Rulings Additional credit must be purchased once Bar Council, pursuant to sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Legal the deposit amount falls below RM50. Profession Act 1976, issues rulings from time to time through its various committees to guide lawyers on questions affecting the practice and etiquette of the profession. Services and charges Self-service With Assistance of The rulings are published in Rules and Rulings of the Bar by Members Library Personnel Council Malaysia issued by Bar Council in 2007. An updated Photocopy Using prepaid cards: Requested at the version is available on the Malaysian Bar Website. New rulings (1) RM30 (yielding counter: 50 sen per and amendments to existing rulings are circulated via email to 96 copies, at page Members of the Bar. approximately 31 sen per page) Requested via The library has amended copies of the Rulings and a compilation (2) RM 50 (yielding telephone, facsimile, of all the amendments/new rulings issued after the publication of 192 copies, at mail or email, etc: 60 the 2007 edition. A new updated print edition of this publication approximately 26 sen per page will be available soon. sen per page) Library services Printing 60 sen per page Requested via telephone, facsimile, The library is open to the following persons: mail or email, etc: 60 sen per page • All Members of the Bar (who possess valid Practising Faxing - RM3 per page (including Certificates), free of charge; photocopying/printing • Pupils in chambers, free of charge; costs) • Anyone who has completed the period of pupillage may continue to use the library for a period of four months, free Delivery/ - Minimum cost of of charge; and Courier RM6 (determined by • Lawyers who have been admitted to the Bar, but have not Service weight) (in addition to yet received their Practising Certificates, are permitted to use photocopying/printing the library without charge for two months after their date of costs) admission, after which they will be charged RM20 per entry.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 25 Features/Articles

Scan and - RM5 service charge Legal An online service by the Singapore email (in addition to Workbench Academy of Law consisting of Singapore photocopying/printing Case Law, The Heritage Law Reports, the costs) Straits Settlements Law Report, Federated Collected - No additional charge Malay States Law Report, Malayan Union by Law Report, English case law from the Members Law Reports and the Weekly Law Reports from 1865 onwards, Indian Supreme Court Cases (“SCC”) from 1969, secondary legal Electronic databases materials, Singapore legislation, Singapore CD-ROM — Full text of cases published in Malayan Law Parliamentary Reports, Singapore treaties, Singapore & Journal (1932–2010) (“MLJ”) and Singapore etc. Malaysia Case Law Reports (1965–2010) (“SLR”). MyCaseLaw This is a case citator on CD-ROM that Law Library encompasses all reported cases from Full text articles published in MLJ (1990– MLJ, Current Law Journal (“CLJ”) and All 2010); more than 3,200 full text unreported Malaysia Reports (“AMR”). It is updated cases and more than 7,200 summaries of once every two months. Malaysian unreported cases in MLJ. MLJ Online The MLJ Online service is in the process of Singapore Case Law Library contains more being installed in the library. than 7,200 Singapore unreported cases in SLR. This service provides MLJ Reported Cases from the Federal Court, Court of Appeal Online Local online database providing access and High Courts (1932 to current), MLJ Database to case laws, statutes, articles, practice Unreported Cases (1992 to current), — CLJ Legal directions, unreported Malaysian case law principal Acts, subsidiary legislation, Network from 1894 onwards. amending Acts and bills and MLJ articles. Lawnet An online service which gives access to The documents are found in PDF format full text of all Acts and amending Acts, from 1992 to current. subsidiary legislation from 1999 onwards, and current bills, main gazettes and State laws.

26 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

Malaysian Bar To determine whether a law library has Library Online print materials by title, author, subject or Public Access keyword, Members may search the library’s Catalogue computerised catalogue — MBLOPAC. (“MBLOPAC”) The library is presently negotiating with the software vendor of the library system to make this available online to Members.

A computerised index of articles, seminar papers, cases, Federal Acts and State Enactments, and the corresponding subsidiary legislation is also maintained and available for in-house use.

Cases reported in all local law reports including specialist report such as the Industrial Law Reports, Personal Injury Reports, etc, are indexed. Federal Acts together with the Amendment Acts and the chambers to locate material in the library, and how to use corresponding subsidiary legislation (PU(A) the catalogue to trace and retrieve specific material as well and PU(B)) and State Enactments and the as attend to inquiries via telephone and email. Help is also corresponding subsidiary legislation (PU) are provided on how to conduct searches on CD-ROMs and indexed with annotations/notes. online databases. Access and Three computers are placed outside the Assistance reference room to access the library’s Legal Research Skills Training catalogue, index and MyCaseLaw index of cases, free of charge. A primary element in achieving success and growth in the legal profession is the mastering of legal research. However, there Assistance will be provided by the staff seems to be not much emphasis on legal research skills as an members if Members find difficulty in using essential component in law studies. Students appear to be trained the catalogue. to pass bar examinations and not to research and think like legal professionals. Moreover research training focuses more on online Staffing research and “Googling” where the end result is quantity and not quality. Training in the effective use of print legal research The library is staffed by a librarian and deputy librarian possessing material and proficient use of indexes, citators, digests, etc, with legal and library and information science qualifications, and four their useful information in cases, legislation, words and phrases experienced and well-trained library assistants. judicially considered is completely lacking these days.

(1) Librarian Taking this into consideration, several seminars and talks on legal research skills were conducted by the librarian in Bar Council, The librarian has more than 40 years of working experience, and at the invitation of some State Bar Committees and law firms 30 years of which were in several government ministries between the years 2005 and 2009. These seminars focused on with legal departments culminating with her appointment exposing participants to print as well as digital databases for as Director of Resource and Documentation in the Judicial researching the law, and the existence of free online databases and Legal Training Institute (“ILKAP”). After her retirement with neutral citations and new local law reports. In addition, the from government service, she has been conducting courses seminars also gave a brief overview of the historical development in ILKAP on legal research skills for participants from of the legal system in the country, and how laws are published, government and semi-government agencies between 1998 come into force and are amended. and 2000. She has been with the Bar Council Library for the past 11 years. Conclusion

(2) Deputy Librarian and Library Assistants Given the immense explosion in legal publications and the media, it is well-nigh impossible economically for any library to The deputy librarian has more than seven years of working be completely comprehensive in its holdings. However, with experience in law firm libraries while the four library assistants the judicious use of information sharing avenues open to law have between two and 15 years’ experience working in librarians, the Bar Council Library staff members have been the Bar Council Library. The library staff members are an able, to a large extent, to satisfy the information requests from invaluable asset to the library because they are always at Members of the Bar. hand and willing to help Members of the Bar and pupils in

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 27 Features/Articles

The “Four Judges Rule” Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 as Narrowed in Terengganu Forest Products Sdn Bhd v Cosco Container Lines Co Ltd & Anor & Other Applications (FC) [2011] 1 CLJ 51 — A Case Study by Anthony J Dason

The Federal Court decision in Terengganu to restrict its jurisdiction and deny access seeks to reduce its jurisdiction, which Forest Products Sdn Bhd v Cosco to its appellate powers, by denying leave, goes against the grain of common law Container Lines Co Ltd [2011] 1 MLJ even if to right a blatant wrong, on the jurisprudential history. There have been 25, while importantly putting to death basis that it is either (a) an appeal on an numerous decisions where the House of the poorly-founded decision relating interlocutory matter, or that (b) the four Lords and Privy Council in the past have to the requirement of two conflicting judges (one High Court and three Court overruled, even unanimous, decisions Court of Appeal judgments as a basis for of Appeal judges), have deliberated and of the English Court of Appeal or applications for leave to appeal to the apex decided (without dissent) consistently on Commonwealth countries court decisions court in the country, set out in Joceline Tan the issue, that the Federal Court should respectively, to allow us to recognise that Poh Choo & Ors v V Muthusamy [2009] therefore not be obliged to be troubled by judges can make wrong decisions and get 1 CLJ 650 which lauded and narrowed such an appeal? away with no consequences. the prior criteria decision for such leave application in Datuk Syed Kechik Syed Would this thinking not negate its position Joceline Tan Poh Choo & Ors v V Mohamed & Anor v The Board of Trustees as the apex appellate court and is it not Muthusamy tried to apply the jurisdiction of the Sabah Foundation & Ors [1999] 1 injustice to litigants, that in the absence criteria of the US Supreme Court, a CLJ 325, unfortunately resonates for other of a public interest in their particular issue jurisdiction based on an error on the reasons. being litigated, this court will not review record, not misapplication of stated such a decision of the Court of Appeal, rules of law, because there is no right of If statutory provisions already exist for however blatantly wrong in law that High appeal but only a complaint by petition on matters specified as original jurisdiction Court decision was approbated in the certiorari. But these jurisdiction criteria matters in the Federal Court, can there be Court of Appeal? are two different creatures, an appeal is any justification for this court to espouse on merits and a certiorari petition is based a narrow definition for section 96 of the Why then does the Federal Court exist? on an error on the face of the record. Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (“CJA”), Maverick indeed is the court that actively

28 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

Rule 10 of the US Supreme Court Rules In comparison to the jurisdiction criteria then leave will not be granted. It ought states: applied in the case of Joceline Tan Poh to be borne in mind that the facts are Considerations Governing Review on Choo & Ors v V Muthusamy, the pre- always different in every case, and there Certiorari conditions of leave to appeal to the will always be a case which is different Federal Court set out in Datuk Syed Kechik or unique on its facts thereby making it Review on a writ of certiorari is not case was based on an ordinary reading of the first case requiring interpretation of a matter of right, but of judicial section 96 of the CJA. Very importantly, a particular statute. Going down this discretion. A petition for a writ of the interpretation of section 96 in the route of analysis, the Terengganu Forest certiorari will be granted only for Datuk Syed Kechik case does not negate Products decision would appear to be compelling reasons. The following, the role of the court to that of rising above hindering progression in the law. although neither controlling nor fully the dispute between the litigants. measuring the Court’s discretion, All in all, the Terengganu Forest Products indicate the character of the reasons On the other hand, the Terengganu Forest decision departs from the norm of “public the Court considers: Products decision departs significantly advantage” as a “public interest” issue from that rubric in refusing to intervene, and even judicial law making, thereby (a) a United States court of appeals even if the final decision of the Court of truncating interest in the leave application has entered a decision in conflict Appeal is blatantly wrong on the law. to a level narrower than the Datuk Syed with the decision of another Kechik’s case. But surely consistency in law, United States court of appeals The CJA makes the Federal Court the apex correcting a wrong decision of the Court on the same important matter; court in the country, which in ordinary of Appeal, and the right of the public, has decided an important federal language means that a litigant has the even if it is “a particular fact situation”, question in a way that conflicts right to appeal to, and the court has the to know what the law is, is to the “public with a decision by a state court of concurrent obligation, to resolve a civil advantage”, is it not? The public may last resort; or has so far departed or commercial dispute, if the decision by in all likelihood not be interested in the from the accepted and usual the Court of Appeal is wrong in law. outcome or consequences of a judicial course of judicial proceedings, decision on a contract between two or sanctioned such a departure Not so, says this apex court, if the decision parties, but surely the public has an by a lower court, as to call does not have as its base issue a res for advantage in appreciating the nuances of for an exercise of this Court’s resolution, which has additionally and judicial pronouncements in respect of the supervisory power; mandatorily, a public interest element. Or conduct of dealings between those very provides the forum for an opportunity to two parties, if the conduct in question (b) a state court of last resort has re-state the law on a given point for the leads to a change in interpretation of the decided an important federal public interest. statute in question. This fact will surely question in a way that conflicts be germane to all contracting parties and with the decision of another state The learned Chief Justice Zaki Tun Azmi relevant to those contracting parties who court of last resort or of a United (“CJ”) also held, “Also, are questions as define the terms of future agreements. States court of appeals; to whether the interpretation of such statutory provisions are likely to be What brought this about? Was it the (c) a state court or a United States relevant to only the particular set of facts amendment to the Constitution and the court of appeals has decided an and to the particular parties, described as Courts of Judicature Act in 1994 creating important question of federal law ‘a particular fact situation’ in Syed Kechik. the Court of Appeal? It cannot be, as even that has not been, but should If they are only relevant to the parties, then as the CJ says, “An appeal from the be, settled by this Court, or has leave should not be granted.” High Court goes to the Court of Appeal decided an important federal and then to the Supreme Court, renamed question in a way that conflicts In essence, by this decision, it appears again as the Federal Court being the apex with relevant decisions of this that not only that the Federal Court has and final appellate court.” Court. abdicated its role if the four judges have made a consistent decision, but the But this court now elevates itself solely A petition for a writ of certiorari is Federal Court is also restricted to situations to be a law making body in its appellate rarely granted when the asserted where the question of law on statutory jurisdiction and decries its role as the error consists of erroneous factual interpretation must be applicable to the final appellate court redressing wrong findings or the misapplication of a general public. If the question of law on decisions in the apex triangle, thereby properly stated rule of law. statutory interpretation is applicable to narrowing its jurisdiction without a firm only the particular or unique situation, basis (at least in my view). It has the right

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 29 Features/Articles

to limit the basis for a leave application will not intervene if the particular leave from an adverse decision in under section 96, but to deny an matter had no possible public interest an interlocutory matter] should be application solely because the matter has to be answered by a ruling and the prepared to be heavily penalized with passed scrutiny under the four judges’ rule four judges rule had been met. costs if they fail to obtain leave. (Zaki (again, only if it is not on an interlocutory A question that is of public importance Tun Azmi CJ) matter — in the latter of which the leave will have a favourable consideration. If Since when can an order for cost be application is now as dead as a door therefore, a dispute between the two more than that allowed under the rules nail, and, on both counts, surpassing parties could be resolved without the of procedure? Every litigant who hazards the perimeters of the Datuk Syed Kechik necessity of answering any question of court adjudication runs the risk of paying decision), is to go in this writer’s view, law, which is not of public importance, costs, sometimes even if successful, but flatly against the law espoused in section the appeal should end at the Court of surely never as a penalty? If the court 96 of the CJA. Appeal. wants to penalise the lawyer for abusing Section 96 (a) does not mention process then the right order is to order The decision by its very core thesis has achieving justice or to correct injustice the lawyer to pay the costs, not the party therefore to throw away the necessary or to correct a grave error of law or facts against whom cost is ordered. But to limitation in both the Datuk Syed Kechik as grounds for granting leave to appeal. create a new head of damages — penalty and Joceline Tan cases, on the question of costs? This statement is more than a Let the lawyers worry about the whether the applicant must also show a threat to stifle litigation and I am indeed absurdity of uncertainty in law, for they prospect of success in a leave application surprised that the Malaysian Bar has as yet get paid to argue it either way. — for the obvious reason that it is no not commented on this rule. longer relevant, applying the four judges rule. This to me is the denouncement of In this surreal realm — why then append Lastly, deciding a seminal landmark its position as the apex court. too, the excuse to the Court of Appeal, to definition case, as is outlined by the CJ, allow them not to write judgments? it is indeed sad that there was a missed So now under the new “four judges opportunity to save litigants cost, court rule” the applicant can have an iron-clad Look at the basis set in a syllogistic time and effort, by not also making it a case, wrongly decided in the High Court argument. peripheral ruling, that the Corum hearing and in the Court of Appeal, but in the Are grounds of judgement of the Court and allowing the leave application, absence of a possible “public interest” of Appeal necessary to an application should in practice go on immediately to its requested ruling, the future Federal for leave? Generally I think not in every to determine the appeal itself, if that Court may have to ignore its obligation, as case. In a [the] relatively short period particular court schedule (and time) the final appellate court and refuse leave. that I have sat on this court I find that permitted. After all counsel comes (or This requirement, for a success prospect, in many of the applications for leave, should come) prepared to argue the apparently only becomes relevant if there grounds of judgement of the Court of appeal on its merits, since all previously are policy decisions and law-making Appeal were not necessary. (Zaki Tun imposed criteria conditions specify a need benefits (or re-statements), to be made Azmi CJ) to show an appealable case on merit, if by the Federal Court in the matter, Does this not exacerbate the uncertainty the (now) several convoluted threshold (which either contradicts the earlier basis in the law, invite invidious comment from criteria are first, somehow met. That the outlined by the court as a basis limitation legal luminaries and bring the entire matter should be re-litigated in a second for jurisdiction, or at best, falls within the Malaysian judicial structure into shame forum, as is the current norm, is a waste now change from “public advantage” to and opprobrium? How much deeper can of court time and cost to all concerned, “public interest”). Therefore even in a it go? unless of course the CJ does not expect situation envisaged by the Federal Court in any leave application to ever succeed or Joceline Tan, that there are two conflicting Then again, what about this new area in alternatively is happy with the current Court of Appeal decisions, albeit in a civil law — punitive costs, the CJ opens up? soaring cost of litigation that is a bane to or commercial matter, that no “Ahmad”, litigants and removing access to civil and Parties insisting to seek leave for “Ah Chong” or “Munusamy” would be commercial justice except to a very small leave in such circumstances [seeking interested in — the new Federal Court portion of the public able to afford it.

30 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Health & Beauty A4 Ad Artwork size: 210mm(w) x 297mm(h) Features/Articles

Improving the Standards of Advocacy

by Brendan Navin Siva and photos by Tuan Mohd Hirman b Abd Raub, Judiciary

The first Advocacy Teacher Training Course (“ATTC”) was held advocacy for the last 20 years. Employing the method known from 18 to 21 Nov 2010 at Istana Kehakiman, Putrajaya. In 2011, as the Hampel Method. It originated in the USA at the National two sessions of ATTC were conducted; ATTC 2 was conducted Institute of Trial Advocacy (“NITA”) and was developed by from 21 to 24 Apr 2011 whereas ATTC 3 was conducted from Professor George Hampel QC. The Hampel Method recognises 10 to 12 Sept 2011. Both were conducted at the Kuala Lumpur that advocacy is a performance skill and that basic advocacy Court Complex, Jalan Duta. techniques could actually be taught to younger advocates. This is done by simulating a courtroom exercise where the participants ATTC 2 and 3 were organised by Bar Council, together with the conduct witness handling (examination-in-chief and cross- Chief Registrar’s Office of the Federal Court of Malaysia, Malaysia examination) and oral submissions. The trainer then identifies and Inner Temple Alumni Association and Lincoln’s Inn Alumni corrects the participants’ performance one point at a time. Association. ATTC 2 was conducted by Peter Birkett QC, Colin McCaul QC, ATTC 2 and 3 were train-the-trainers sessions, which involved the Iain Morley QC and Sarah Clarke. ATTC 3 in September 2011 training of members of the Malaysian Bar and Judiciary by senior was conducted by Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Justice Alan barristers and judges from the United Kingdom. Saggerson, William Stevenson QC, Dr Michael J Powers QC, Benjamin Aina QC, David Dabbs and Michele O’Leary. The four Inns of Court, the Circuits and the Bar Vocational Course Providers have been using a structured method of teaching

32 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

Many Members of the Malaysian Bar have been trained to A cursory perusal of the feedback/evaluation forms revealed that be advocacy trainers. We are now well placed to build on the the participants found their trainers to be very “approachable” and advocacy training courses that have already been run in January “pleasant”. One participant remarked, “Before this, I have never and March 2011 where we have trained a total of 60 junior conducted any trial and I was able to learn so much including how lawyers. to structure my questioning”. According to another participant, the ATC was “a good experience… I didn’t feel humiliated at all The Organising Committee intends to organise regular advocacy in front of the trainers and other participants”. Many participants training courses throughout the year for junior lawyers (“ATC”). pointed out that the video review sessions were especially helpful The following dates at the following venues and more are planned as they were able to observe themselves performing as advocates, in 2012 (venues and dates to be confirmed) thus highlighting areas that needed improvement. (1) 19 and 20 Nov 2011 Kuala Lumpur Court Complex (2) 3 and 4 Dec 2011 Malacca Court Complex Given the nature of the teaching method employed, the ATC is open to only 30 participants per session. The participation fee is So far two ATCs have been held in KL (22-23 Jan 2011 and 8-9 only RM500 per person for a two-day intensive course. Oct 2011) and one outstation training in Johor Bahru (22-23 Oct 2011). The overall feedback from trainees was that the ATC For further information or to register, kindly contact Matthew training method was very practical in identifying the flaws in their Winfred ([email protected]) or Ambran Abu Bakar performances and showing them proper advocacy techniques in ([email protected]). a memorable manner.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 33 Features/Articles

The Curious Case of April Human Ashley by Mariette Peters

Chaz Bono, Thomas Beattie, Jessie Chung in most of the Commonwealth countries. intimidation9 and insulting the modesty of and Aleesha Farhana all have something The reliance on this precedent has resulted a woman10. The type of punishment meted in common. They are transsexuals, having in an anomalous situation for transsexuals out is also gender-specific as section 289 undergone gender-reassignment surgery both in Malaysia and to a certain extent, of the Criminal Procedure Code prohibits and having found themselves in situations our neighbour, Singapore. women from being caned11. which attracted both cynicism and sympathy from the public. The most recent manifestation of this The Malaysian Dilemma peculiar situation was witnessed in the In Malaysia, transsexuals or trans-genders1, failure of 26-year-old male-to-female The issue that appears to be at the heart as they are known, find themselves in an transsexual, Mohd Ashraf Hafiz Abdul of the problem is the absence of the awkward situation — in a legal limbo Aziz, to change his name to Aleesha definition of gender, thus, the reference simply because of the reservation and coy Farhana3. to Corbett. In that case, the factors attitude of the authorities in recognising that were taken into consideration in their post-operative gender. This article Gender and the Law determining the gender of a person attempts to examine the current situation were chromosomal, gonadal, genital and and the reasons for such, and whether we Gender defines the very essence of our psychological. should emulate our Western counterparts existence. Most of our laws are very much in dealing with the dilemma. gender-delineated. The most obvious is In Malaysia, the courts were forced to the law governing marriage. Non-Muslims address this issue in two separate cases. In Who is April Ashley who choose to marry have no choice but Wong Chiou Yong v Pendaftar Besar/Ketua to enter into a monogamous marriage. Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara12, a On 10 Sept 1963, April Ashley and Arthur A monogamous marriage is defined in female to male transsexual applied to the Corbett were married in Gibraltar. About section 3 of the Interpretation Acts 1948 Register of Births and Deaths to amend his a month later, the marriage was over. and 1967 as follows: birth certificate (“BC”) and identity card Three years later, April filed a maintenance … a marriage which is recognised (“NRIC”) to reflect the change in gender. suit but in 1967, Arthur challenged the by the law of the place where it is The application was made on the ground validity of the marriage on the basis contracted as a voluntary union of that there was an error in the entry of that April Ashley was born a man, and one man and one woman to the the register book. The relevant provisions therefore such union did not fall within the exclusion of all others during the are section 27 of the Births and Deaths definition of marriage which was defined continuance of the marriage. Registration Act 1957 and section 6 of the as a “union between male and female”. National Registration Act 1959. Section 6 allows for corrections and alterations to be Hence, a marriage which is not between It appeared that April Ashley, who was made to the register and identity card, but a male and female respectively is deemed born in 1935, was in fact born a male. section 27 stipulates that the basis for the to be null and void. This is provided for in Her name was George Jamieson and she correction or alteration should be an error. section 69 of the Law Reform (Marriage & had undergone a sex-change operation at Divorce) Act 1976 which reads: the age of 35. The operation consisted of The High Court refused to order the the amputation of the testicles and most A marriage which takes place after alteration to be made on the ground that of the scrotum and the construction of an the appointed date shall be void if — there was no error made to the register artificial vagina. Arthur Corbett knew of (d) the parties are not respectively when registering the gender of the April’s history, yet he filed a petition that male and female. applicant, since the applicant was in fact the marriage be declared null and void. born a female. The strict letter of the law Other laws which are gender-specific was adhered to: The petitioner succeeded on the basis include criminal law, with particular Parliament could not have envisaged that the court recognised only the gender reference to criminal force4, rape5, the type of grievance faced by the at birth, and regardless of a gender- kidnapping or abducting a woman to applicant when Act 1957 and Act reassignment surgery. compel her marriage6, enticing or taking 1959 were introduced. The decision away or detaining with a criminal intent to be made on this application Corbett v Corbett a married woman7, cohabitation caused should not conflict with the spirit by a man deceitfully inducing belief of and intention of the legislature as The case is now famously known as lawful marriage8, punishment for criminal expressly stipulated in Act 1957. Corbett v Corbett2, adopted as a precedent

34 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Features/Articles

On the issue of the gender-reassignment Court of the validity of their marriage. The surgery, it was held that such procedure They have considered the sex Attorney General for the Commonwealth had no effect on the status of the change of the plaintiff as well as her intervened to oppose the application. applicant’s true gender. Corbett was psychological aspect. She feels like referred to and followed. Although the a woman, lives like one, behaves as Justice Chisolm of the Family Court of Court adopted the traditional approach one has her physical body attuned to Australia finally put the Corbett decision in dismissing the applicant’s application, one and most important of all, her to rest when he said that that case did Justice VT Singham appeared to empathise psychological thinking is that of a not represent Australian law. In fact his with the plight of transsexuals when he woman. Lordship considered factors such as the said: person’s life experiences, including the Although the applicant and the Dilution of Corbett? sex in which he or she is brought up and transsexuals cannot be left to live in the person’s attitude to it; the person’s legal limbo but however the remedy In fact, one may find it interesting to know self-perception as a man or woman; the for registration as to their current that Corbett has, to a certain extent, been extent to which the person is functioned gender is with Parliament and not diluted by the Court of Appeal in Bellinger in society as a man or a woman. 15 the courts as any fact changed in the v Bellinger through the dissenting registration of transsexual must be judgment of Lord Thorpe: The novelty of Kevin’s case found introduced by Act of Parliament and … the foundations of Ormrod J’s footing on the dichotomy between cannot probably be made by judicial judgment are no longer secure. It “sex” and “gender”, terminologies used pronouncement. remains as a monument to his mastery interchangeably but are more often than of complex scientific evidence and not misunderstood and misapplied. Whilst It is interesting to note the contrary to his clarity of thought and lucidity “sex” refers to the biological make-up approach by Justice James Foong in J-G v of expression. It served its time well of the person, such as emphasis on the Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara13. but its time has passed. Recently it chromosomes, hormones and internal The plaintiff was born a male but had has been criticised, particularly by and sexual organs, “gender” refers to the undergone a gender-reassignment surgery commentators in other jurisdictions, characteristics, behavior and role of that when he was 22 years old. The plaintiff’s for the insensitivity of its language. person. application for a MyKad however, was That criticism risks injustice to a faced with obstacles when she was told judge of exceptional humanity and It is obvious that whilst Corbett focused that the MyKad would state the plaintiff’s understanding. The language reflects on “sex”, Kevin hinged on “gender”, gender as male. the era in which it was written rather probably explaining the reason for than the writer. But his judgment does the more holistic phrase “gender- The court took into account the four not bind us and, for reasons upon reassignment” in comparison to “sex- factors stipulated in Corbett but was of which I will endeavour to expand change”. the view that the psychological factor was later, should not in my opinion now not given enough significance. Reference be followed. The Singapore situation was also made to cases from Australia, Ormrod J’s monumental judgment in In Singapore, the case that dealt with in particular AG for the Commonwealth Corbett v Corbett was undoubtedly 14 the legal impediment to the marriage v Kevin & Ors . In doing so, the court right when given on 2 February 1970. arrived at the conclusion that of a transsexual is Lim Ying v Hiok Kian It is only subsequent developments, Ming, Eric16. A petition for divorce was when a person’s gender-identification both medical and social, that render filed by the petitioner wife on the ground differs from his or her biological sex, it wrong in 2001. that her husband was a female-to-male the former should, in all cases, prevail. transsexual. In relying on Corbett, it It would allow that all transsexuals If Corbett v Corbett reflects the traditional was held that the petitioner was entitled would be treated in law according approach, what then reflects the to a decree of nullity declaring that to the sex-identification, regardless progressive approach? On this point, the marriage solemnised between the of whether they had undertaken reference may be made to Australia and petitioner and the respondent was void any medical treatment to make even recent developments in Singapore. ab initio by reason that the parties to the their bodies conform with the marriage were both female gender. identification, thus upholding the The Australian position principle that we do not determine The effect of the case resulted in the sex; in medicine we determine sex in In Australia, the case of AG for the amendments in 1996 to the Women’s which it is best for the individual to Commonwealth v Kevin & Ors appears to Charter of Singapore. The amendments live. be a landmark decision. Kevin, a female- were explained by Parliament as a practical to-male transsexual who had intended to and humane response to the problems The psychological factor played an marry a woman, wrote to the Attorney faced by transsexuals. Section 12(2) of important role in the decision of the High General asking whether their proposed the Women’s Charter now allows for Court to allow the plaintiff’s application. marriage would be legal. After receiving a marriage to be solemnised between After considering the evidence from the an inconclusive response, the couple went a person who has undergone a sex- medical experts, it was stated by Justice ahead and married but subsequently reassignment procedure and any person James Foong: sought a declaration from the Family of the opposite gender.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 35 Features/Articles

The third gender? homosexuals, which is a clear violation of imprisonment for a term which may extend the freedom of expression19 and the right to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. More countries are coming to terms with to live20 — fundamental liberties that are 7 Section 498 of the Penal Code: transsexuals although they have done so found in the Federal Constitution. Whoever takes or entices away any woman in their own way. For instance, recently who is and whom he knows, or has reason a court in Thailand ordered the military An approach that may be considered to believe to be the wife of any other man, to stop labelling transgender people as reasonable and practical is to presume from that man, or from any person having being mentally ill. Both Pakistan and that the gender of a person is his gender the care of her on behalf of that man, with India, on the other hand, have recognised as stated in his birth certificate but to intent that she may have illicit intercourse with transsexuals as a separate gender — the allow for such presumption to be rebutted any person or conceals or detains with that third gender, or hijra, a catch-all term in by tendering to the authorities a report intent any such woman, shall be punished with the Urdu language to refer to transvestites, certified by at least two or three medical imprisonment for a term which may extend transsexuals and even eunuchs17. As a practitioners, confirming otherwise. The to two years or with fine, or with both. result, hijras can now give their gender burden of proof should be imposed on the 8 Section 493 of the Penal Code: as “E” for eunuchs on their passports person claiming to have had his gender Every man who by deceit causes any woman and government forms. Although this altered. who is not lawfully married to him, to believe may not be an ideal situation, as most that she is lawfully married to him and to cohabit transsexuals identify themselves as either This approach, it is submitted, may be a or have sexual intercourse with him in that male or female, rather than a third gender, solution to accommodating the religious belief, shall be punished with imprisonment it signifies some form of progression for sensitivities of the public and at the same for a term which may extend to ten years, transsexuals in India and Pakistan. time, extricating the transsexual from his and shall also be liable to fine. legal limbo. 9 Whoever commits the offence of criminal Conclusion intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment 1 In this article, a separation is maintained between for a term which may extend to two years, or It appears that whilst gender reassignment “transsexuals” and “transvestites”, as the latter is with fine, or with both; and if the threat be to surgeries are not illegal in Malaysia, there used to refer to those who cross-dress. Although cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the are legal impediments arising from the it has been argued that there may be an overlap destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an result of such procedure. Calls have been between transvestites, the focus of this article offence punishable with death or imprisonment, made from several quarters to address is on those who have undergone a gender- or with imprisonment for a term which may the “legal limbo” that transsexuals find reassignment surgery. extend to seven years, or to impute unchastity to themselves in. Countries, especially in 2 [1970] 2 All ER 33. a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment continental Europe and even the UK 3 The New Straits Times, 19 July 2011, Ashraf fails for a term which may extend to seven years, or have been cited as models to emulate in bid to be Aleesha Farhana. with fine, or with both. since these countries provide gender- 4 Section 350 of the Penal Code: 10 Section 509 of the Penal Code: recognition certificates to transsexuals to Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of facilitate their professional and personal without that person’s consent, in order to cause any person, utters any word, makes any sound affairs. In fact, in 2002, the European the committing of any offence, or intending or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending Court of Human Rights in the case of by the use of such force illegally to cause, that such word or sound shall be heard, or that Christine Goodwin v UK18, held that the or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such gesture or object shall be seen by such lack of legal recognition of the post- such force he will illegally cause injury, fear, person, or intrudes upon the privacy of such operative gender was a violation of the or annoyance to the person to whom the person, shall be punished with imprisonment right of respect to private life, entrenched force is used, is said to use criminal force to for a term which may extend to five years, or in article 8 of the European Convention of that other. Illustration (f): A intentionally with fine, or with both. Human Rights. pulls up a woman’s veil. Here A intentionally 11 … none of the following persons shall be punishable uses force to her; and if he does so without with whipping: In Malaysia, although certain groups her consent, intending or knowing it to be (a) females; have been quite zealous in their efforts to likely that he may thereby injure, frighten, or 12 [2005] 1 CLJ 622, HC, not sure if HC should be address the issue, the issue may be more annoy her, he has used criminal force to her. preceded by a comma deep-rooted as our views and opinions 5 Section 375 of the Penal Code: 13 [2005] 4 CLJ 710, HC. are entrenched in tradition and religious A man is said to commit “rape” who… has 14 [2003] FAM CA 94. doctrines. This would then warrant a sexual intercourse with a woman … 15 [2001] EWCA Civ 1140. balancing act between law and morality 6 Section 366 of the Penal Code: 16 [1992] 1 CLJ 569, HC. as views may sway in favour of our moral Whoever kidnaps or abducts any woman 17 Although a eunuch conventionally refers to a compass. with intent that she may be compelled, or surgically-castrated male, the meaning today knowing it to be likely that she will be compelled has extended to men who display effeminate What appears ironic, however, is whilst to marry any person against her will, or in characteristics. This group of persons is not some of us preach and promote the order that she may be forced or seduced to necessarily transsexuals. concept of equality with reference to illicit intercourse, or to a life of prostitution, 18 Application No 28957/95 ECHR. article 8 of the Federal Constitution, we or knowing it to be likely that she will be 19 Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. are indifferent to the legal intolerance forced or seduced to illicit intercourse, or to 20 Article 5 of the Federal Constitution. of transsexuals or even transvestites and a life of prostitution, shall be punished with

36 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 C M Y K

With Best Compliments from

C M C M Y K Y K

C M Y K Events

Conference on Legal Education in Malaysia Qualifying For the Bar: Standards Across the Jurisdictions (29 and 30 Aug 2011)

by Low Teck Kuan and photos by Ambran Abu Bakar and Mohd Faizal Mahat

The Conference on Legal Education in Malaysia, jointly organised by Bar Council and Taylor’s University, on 29 and 30 Aug 2011 was an extremely fruitful one. The conference was well attended by the various stakeholders in the legal profession. It was a historical event as for the first time, all the stakeholders in the legal profession came together under one roof to give their views on the proposed Common Bar Course (“CBC”).

The Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Common Bar Course, Steven Thiru, in his keynote speech said that Bar Council is proposing the CBC as one of its concerted efforts to arrest the sharp decline in quality and standards in the new entrants to the legal profession.

Bar Council has discovered that many pupils reading in chambers have “abysmal language skills, poor ethical values and abject absence of fundamental legal skills”. Steven Thiru highlighted that these serious shortcomings were fairly across the board, in that it could not be pinned down to any one of the universities, colleges or the Certificate in Legal Practice (“CLP”).

In consequence of these shortcomings, many law firms face difficulties in finding the right candidate with the ability, quality and knowledge to fill their vacancies. Christopher Leong, Vice-President of the Malaysian Bar said that “there must be quality, knowledge, skill and ability underlying the paper qualification. We do

38 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Events

not wish to have graduates who cannot To further explore the feasibility of English Language Testing System find employment or not be able to hold a implementing the CBC and ascertaining (“IELTS”). Such a move is important as job ... We want lawyers who are stronger the standards it should reach, Bar Council poor standards of English in young lawyers — in the sense that we want to plant steel invited six distinguished guest speakers are a global concern and not just confined in their backbone, and make them faster to explain the legal education system in to Hong Kong alone. — in terms of their mind”. seven different jurisdictions; namely the United Kingdom, Singapore, Australia, During the conference, various concerns One of the reasons for these shortcomings India, Canada, New Zealand and Hong and reservations on the proposed CBC is the multiple entry points into the legal Kong. were raised by the representatives from profession, which allows for differing the public law schools. standards which produces pupils ranging One of the key similarities of these from the very poor to the quite good. legal education systems is that they The teaching methodology of the proposed are vocational in nature. Simply put, it CBC also became a point of discussion. In To deal with this issue, Bar Council has emphasises on teaching the areas of law response to the concerns raised by Bar proposed that there should be a single in a practical way. Its core objective is of Council that Malaysia may be behind entry point into the legal profession in course to equip students with the relevant other developed jurisdictions in terms of Malaysia, regardless of undergraduate or minimum legal skills which they require in teaching methodology, representatives post graduate qualifications. The proposed order to practice. from the public university noted that CBC should act as the last gate of entry, they have already been bridging the gap regardless of where they graduate from. In addition, most jurisdictions have between vocational training and academic The CBC should be vocational in nature, standardised the point of entry before teaching. in that it should train and instil the admission into their own bar. For example, necessary minimum skills needed before in Hong Kong, as stated above, both Despite the reservation and concerns law graduates could enter into the legal local and foreign law graduates have to raised, students and pupils reading in profession. obtain the Postgraduate Certificate in Law chambers generally agreed that the (“PCLL”) first before they can enter into its proposed CBC should be implemented. As part of experiential learning, the Ad Hoc legal profession. Similar approaches were In addition, the students/pupils main Committee also proposed that the CBC be also adopted in Singapore, India and New concerns were on the affordability of conducted in a modern approach, which Zealand. the CBC programme, and the length has a mixture of lecture-seminar/tutorials, of time local graduates have to spend online learning, DVDs, practical and Dieter Yih, Vice-President of the Law studying (four years + 20 months of CBC) industrial training. Also, legal practitioners Society of Hong Kong stated that one as compared to foreign graduates (three (who have firsthand experience in practice) of the main challenges Hong Kong faces years + 20 months of CBC). They took should be brought into the CBC to provide today is that law graduates possess poor the view that there should be a good for better learning experiences. standard of English. Hence, to be admitted collaboration between Bar Council and into the PCLL, students must undertake various law schools (private and public) in and score at least 7.0 in the International implementing the CBC programme.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 39 Events

International Day of the World’s Indigenous People 2011 Celebration at Bar Council (13 Aug 2011)

Contributed by Christina Gomez with photos by Simon and Lisa Thomas, Photographers

The International Day of the World’s Indigenous People falls on 9 August each year, and its global theme for 2011 was “Indigenous Designs: Celebrating Stories and Culture, Crafting Our Own Future”. To commemorate the occasion this year, the Bar Council Committee on Orang Asli Rights (“COAR”) organised a “celebration dinner” at 5:00 pm, at the Bar Council Auditorium, on 13 Aug 2011 (Saturday). The event was attended by over 205 Orang Asli in addition to 30 Members of the Malaysian Bar, members of COAR and the Bar Council Human Rights Committee (“BCHRC”), invited guests and members of the press.

The event started off with welcome speeches from Lim Chee Wee, President of the Malaysian Bar; Steven Thiru, Co-Chairperson of COAR and Treasurer of the Malaysian Bar; and Shafie b Dris, an Orang Asli representative from Pahang, followed by the screening of a 30-minute documentary entitled Hak Dinafikan.

The evening was also graced by several performances by the Orang Asli groups present. Shortly after the performance, guests were served with a lovely buka puasa buffet dinner spread at 7:30 pm.

The night proceeded with speeches by Dr Selva Vathany K Pillai, a medical doctor and health and human rights social activist; and Sokyen Man, founder and President of Jaringan Perpaduan Orang Asli (“JPOA”). Dr Selva Vathany K Pillai revealed that from early 2012, the administration of Gombak Hospital will be taken over by KKM – a piece of news that was well received by all those present.

The rest of the evening saw more dance and musical performances followed by a closing speech by Colin Nicholas, Coordinator of the Centre for Orang Asli Concerns, a non-governmental organisation. The event ended at approximately 10:30 pm.

40 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Events

National Symposium on Islamic Banking and Finance (12 Sept 2011) by Andrew Khoo and photos by Chiam Ter Ping

The Bar Council’s Islamic Finance Committee, together with the Association of Islamic Banking Institutions Malaysia (“AIBIM”), successfully organised the final edition of the National Symposium on Islamic Banking and Finance on 12 Sept 2011 in Kuala Lumpur. A total of 552 participants attended.

Dato’ Mohd Redza Shah Abdul Wahid, President of AIBIM and Lim Chee Wee, President of the Malaysian Bar, gave welcome remarks on behalf of AIBIM and the Malaysian Bar, respectively. In his comments, the President of the Malaysian Bar paid tribute to Allahyarham Dato’ Mohd Razif b Abdul Kadir, the Deputy Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia (“BNM”), who passed away on 8 Aug 2011. Allahyarham was a staunch supporter of the National Symposium on Islamic Banking and Finance, and gave the keynote messages at many previous editions around the country over the last two years.

On this occasion, the keynote message was delivered by Bakarudin Ishak, Assistant Governor of BNM. He highlighted the distinctive features of Islamic finance, the development of Islamic finance in Malaysia, Malaysia’s aspirations for the future of its Islamic finance industry, and the role of the legal profession in the Malaysia International Islamic Financial Centre (“MIFC”) initiative. He identified three possible areas of further collaboration between BNM and the legal profession in respect of MIFC: interactive participation in the ongoing initiatives of the Law Harmonisation Committee; development of legal standards in line with Syariah parameters; and enhancing attractiveness of Malaysia as a platform for international Islamic finance dispute settlements. and detailed their principal characteristics and variations, as well as their associated transactional usage. This was followed by four presentations. Associate Professor Dr Asyraf Wajdi Dato’ Dusuki, Head of Research Affairs, International Although there were opportunities to ask questions during each Shari’ah Research Academy for Islamic Finance (“ISRA”), gave session, the day-long Symposium ended with a full-fledged an introduction to Islamic banking products from a Syariah forum on “Islamic Finance — Its Future”. This forum was perspective. Associate Professor Dr Engku Rabiah Adawiah of the moderated by Megat Hizaini Hassan, Member of the Bar. The Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University panel comprised Associate Prof Dr Asyraf Wajdi, Mohd Shuhaimi Malaysia, presented a paper entitled “Islamic Banking and Finance Ismail, and Mohamed Ridza Mohamed Abdulla, Member of the — Legal Perspective”. In it, she reviewed the expectations and Bar. Participants were able to raise questions on a whole range legal framework of Islamic finance. of issues that had been prompted by the day’s presentations. The questions addressed both specific issues of documentation Wan Abdul Rahim Kamil Wan Mohamed Ali, a consultant with and macro topics such as future financial products and other the Securities Commission, spoke on “Islamic Finance — Capital developments in Islamic finance. Market and Sukuk”. After lunch, Mohd Shuhaimi Ismail, a Member of the Bar took participants through several types of The Bar Council’s Islamic Finance Committee hopes to launch Islamic finance documentation. He described and explained some further training sessions so as to provide continuous and of the different Syariah financial products currently in the market, progressive education for Islamic finance practitioners.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 41 Events

Forum on Assisting Upcoming Events Small Law Firms in Achieving Their Fullest Potential (29 July 2011) by Christina Gomez and photos by Satha Selvan Organised by Kedah/Perlis Bar Committee

The Bar Council Small Firms Committee (“SFC”) was set up Projek Jelajah National Young Lawyers (Kedah/Perlis) earlier this year to assist small law firms in achieving their fullest with Office Bearers and Young Lawyers potential. As its inaugural event, SFC organised a “Forum on Small Law Firms” at 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm, at the Bar Council Date: 20 Nov 2011 (Sunday) Auditorium, on 29 July 2011 (Friday). The two-hour forum was Time: To be confirmed attended by 60 participants, consisting of Members of the Bar, Venue: To be confirmed pupils in chambers and staff members of law firms. Contact: Zahidah Hanim bt Zainul Abidin (04-730 The forum featured Mathew Thomas Philip, an advocate and 8305/733 3467) solicitor, who gave a talk entitled “10 Things Small Law Firms Can Do to Help Themselves”. During his talk, he covered various Kedah/Perlis Bar Family Day things small law firms could do to help themselves and the Date: 17 Dec 2011 (Saturday) one thing that Bar Council could do to assist. Following that, Time: To be confirmed participants were invited to join an open discussion to raise the Venue: Cinta Sayang Water Theme Park, Sg Petani issues and concerns faced by small firm practitioners and what Bar Council could do to help them. Contact: Zahidah Hanim bt Zainul Abidin (04-730 8305/733 3467) George Varughese, Chairperson of SFC, was pleased with the turnout at the forum and the positive feedback received from Kedah/Perlis Bar Annual Dinner Members. In line with SFC’s objective of helping small law firms Date: January 2012 achieving their fullest potential, George Varughese assured the Time: To be confirmed participants that Bar Council would look into measures that it could take, including in collaboration with other organisations or Venue: Seri Malaysia Hotel Kangar, Perlis companies, to benefit small firms in the long run. Contact: Ahmad Zaini Samsudin (04-977 1419/1420) Organised by Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee

Kuala Lumpur Bar Annual Dinner and Dance Date: 12 Nov 2011 (Saturday) Time: 7:30 pm onwards Venue: Cititel Hotel, Kuala Lumpur Contact: S Uvanarajan (Rajan) (03-2693 3585) Organised by Terengganu Bar Committee Projek Jelajah National Young Lawyers (Terengganu) Date: 18 Dec 2011 (Sunday) Time: 12:00 pm to 2:00 pm Venue: Motel Desa Terengganu Contact: Hazri b Haris (09-6231 729)

42 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Events

Tripartite Meeting between Sabah Law Association, Advocates’ Association of Sarawak and Malaysian Bar (16 Sept 2011) By Rajen Devaraj and photos by Satha Selvan

The Tripartite Meeting between the Sabah Law Association (“SLA”), the Advocates’ Association of Sarawak (“AAS”) and Malaysian Bar (“MB”) took place on 16 Sept 2011. The Tripartite Meeting between the three Bars is an annual affair while the Tripartite Games takes place once every two years.

The delegation from SLA was led by their President GBB Nandy @ Gaanesh while the delegation from AAS was led by their President, Khairil Azmi. Lim Chee Wee led the delegation from MB.

The meeting was an historic one as the three Bars issued a joint press statement in response to the Prime Minister’s Malaysia Day.

The following issues were discussed at the Tripartite Meeting and the three Bars:

• Agreed to support a publicity campaign to raise awareness and call for the restoration of the original Article 121(1);

• Called on the Government to reduce the proposed value jurisdiction of the Sessions Court to RM500,000 and to retain the jurisdiction for equitable remedies with the High Court;

• Recognised that there is a need for a single entry point and a uniform system of training for all new entrants to the legal profession and accept that there is a need for a Common Bar Course subject to the respective law governing the advocates of the three Bars;

• Agreed to collaborate by way of exchange of knowledge, expertise and experience in respect of native rights matters, in particular, the gathering of evidence to enable lawyers to provide effective representation.

The Penang Declaration, which will be finalised shortly, will incorporate the points of agreement outlined above.

The next Tripartite meeting will be held in Kuching in conjunction with the Bench and Bar Games 2012.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 43 Events

5th China-ASEAN Forum on Legal Cooperation and Development (CAFTA 2011) By Leong Zhi Hong, Co-Deputy Chairperson (Southern Region), Bar Council National Young Lawyers Committee and photos by Ambran Abu Bakar The long awaited 5th China-ASEAN Forum on Legal Cooperation and Development (“CAFTA 2011”) had finally arrived at Shangri-La Hotel, Kuala Lumpur! The event, which was held over two days, started with the registration of delegates at 8:00 am on 26 Sept 2011 (Monday). Over 320 delegates from Brunei, China, France, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam had registered for the Forum.

The Forum began officially at 8:45 am with the arrival of distinguished guests. In his welcome address, YABhg Tun Zaki b Tun Azmi, President of ASEAN Law Association Malaysia, greeted all the delegates and expressed his gratitude to YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria, the new Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Malaysia, for agreeing to deliver the Forum’s first keynote address. YABhg Tun Zaki b Tun Azmi continued by explaining that the China-ASEAN market was about the free movement of goods, services and capital across multiple jurisdictions, and was a vastly different operating environment from that of the national market jurisdiction. Thus, successful law firms, lawyers and legal systems in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (“ASEAN”) region would be those that are able to carve out an active role in regional trade. He highlighted that increased cross- border transactions would require cross-jurisdictional legal advice for dispute resolution, and the four sessions of the Forum would discuss the main areas of relevance to the changing landscape.

The topics for the first and second sessions were “Disputes under the International Trade and Investment Treaties” and “Arbitral Institutions in CAFTA Region – Opportunities and Challenges”. YABhg Tun Zaki b Tun Azmi noted that within the China-ASEAN region, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes had concluded arrangements to facilitate investment arbitration in Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Hong Kong. For Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur was promoted as the regional arbitration centre, and Malaysian courts supported and enforced agreements for arbitration. The topics for the third and fourth sessions were “Present and Future Development of CAFTA and Ongoing Liberalisation of Trade in Goods and Services in the Movement of Capital” and “Liberalisation of CAFTA Legal Services”. For the legal services sector, transformation was required to adapt to the new regional trade landscape. The China-ASEAN Trade Area would only be possible with the liberalisation of laws and regulations that governed the legal profession.

The second welcome address of the Forum was given by Hu Zhong, Vice-President of China Law Society. In his speech, Hu Zhong revealed that most of the delegates from China were stepping on the land of Malaysia for the first time and that they had received a very special and warm reception upon arrival. He noted that the year 2011 marked 20 years since the establishment of the China-ASEAN Trade Area, adding that the China-ASEAN

44 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Events

bilateral relationship had brought great benefits to all parties, in the region. He acknowledged that China was Malaysia’s largest addition to strengthening them. He pointed out that in 2011, trading partner, and that exports from Malaysia to China had China had become ASEAN’s largest treaty partner, and ASEAN, increased due to the China-ASEAN Trade Area. He also gave a in turn, was China’s fourth largest trading partner. brief description of arbitration in Malaysia, explaining that the Arbitration Act 2005 – the law governing arbitration in Malaysia The official opening ceremony of the Forum, which included a – had come into force on 15 Mar 2006. ribbon-cutting ritual to unveil the organisers’ banners, featured YABhg Tun Zaki b Tun Azmi; Hu Zhong; YA Tan Sri James YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria also informed delegates that the Foong, Chairperson of the CAFTA 2011 Organisng Committee; Malaysian Judiciary had started a process of reform in 2008, Lim Chee Wee, President of Malaysian Bar; and Sundra Rajoo, and had introduced a series of initiatives such as e-court, queue Director of Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration. The management system, e-filing, and introduction of the Intellectual vibrant ceremony, which also featured a drum performance that Property Court and Admiralty Court, enabling a more efficient reflected Malaysia’s multiculturalism, received hearty applause disposal of cases. While discussing the liberalisation of Malaysia’s from the delegates. legal system, he was firm in stating that the Judiciary would foster a close relationship between the Bar and the Bench. In YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria delivered the first keynote address concluding his speech, YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria congratulated next. In his speech, he briefly described the China-ASEAN Trade the organising committee for successfully organising the Forum, Area and affirmed that it had benefited the China-ASEAN and wished all delegates a fruitful and productive forum. territory, in addition to enhancing peace and political stability in

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 45 Events

Fun in the Sun at Cherating, Kuantan (30 Sept to 2 Oct 2011) by Sumitha Shaanthinni Kishna and photos by Sumitha Shaanthinni Kishna and Brenden Anthony

The Bar Council staff trip to Cherating, Kuantan was easily voted door gifts. Straw hats encrusted with sea shells were distributed as one of the best staff events organised as it attracted the to the women while the men were given straw cowboy Malboro most number of staff and family members — 91 individuals in hats. Children were treated to squeaky toy ducks, swimming all! The trip was most welcomed as the Bar Council Secretariat floats and soft toys. Everyone also received silver lidded-mugs and staff members had been busy at work including assisting in the soft toy keychains. Later, we feasted on a scrumptious dinner. numerous conferences organised by Bar Council since the start While some retired to bed after the meal, others enjoyed the of the term. music churned out by the live band at the resort’s Fun Pub.

Two buses ferried us to Cherating from the congregating point It was only at daybreak that we realised the beautiful surroundings at the Bar Council building on 30 Sept 2011 (Friday) for a three- of the four-star resort set on 35 acres of land. The resort was built hour journey along the East-West Highway. The slight drizzle did to capture the finest traditional Malay architecture. Our rooms nothing to dampen our spirit as we chatted and partied in the were tastefully decorated with views of the sea, complete with busses and refused to catch 40-winks lest we miss the fun! comfortable conventional four-posted wooden beds, flat screen televisions and mini bars. We were also close to nature with an We sighted village settings in the final 30-minute drive on a rural unspoiled mini jungle on one side and the seashell-strewn beach road. Quaint restaurants outlined with colourful light bulbs and fringing the vast sea on another. We were woken up in the shops selling the famous keropok lekor were in abundance. As morning by the peaceful lapping of the waves. we turned the corner into Impiana Cherating Resort, the road led us through a 100-metre driveway lined with rows of yellow On Day 2 after breakfast, we assembled near the pool for a Allamanda leading to the porch of the resort, which displayed a 10-minute poco-poco dance choreographed by our games welcome banner for us. instructor. We were then divided in four groups and played six games. The most difficult game was the tug-of-war as we could We trudged with our bags up two flights of steps to the lobby barely keep ourselves from falling on the sandy beach. We rested where the registration team greeted us with welcome drinks and during intervals quenching our thirst with grape cordial.

46 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Events

The following winners took home cash prizes.

Bravo: 1st prize Charlie: 2nd prize Anne Andrew Abd Samat Mohd Kassim (LAC) Francis Xavier Lechiah Chandramalar K Muhtu Jeevanathan Angappan (LAC) Chin Oy Sim Kumar Punusamay Mohd Esman Basri Mazillah Azwin Kamal Azmi (DB) Farah Diana Musa (DB) Nahdhatusyima Osman (DB) Hemalatha Subramaniam Roslina Razak Manimaran Sinnakanoo (LAC) Rosmawati Deraman (DB) Nur Atiqah Mohammad Mahfol Saiful Rizal Mohd Karim Siti Rokiah Morshid Satha Selvan Subramaniam Sree Gayathiri Maruthuvellu Siti Namirah Johari Suvitha Marimuthu Su See Mun Taneshkumar Nagarajan Delta: 3rd prize Alpha: 4th prize Navaneethan Balakrishnan Anpanadan Kathavarayan Mazni Ibrahim Anuradha M Andiappan Hussein Thajudeen Brenden Anthony Ezane Mansor Obaid Cheryl Foo Chooi Guan Vanimalar Moneyselvam Chiam Ter Ping Florence Laway Christina Adele Gomez Chuah Ying Ying Geraldine Chye Min Li Edna P Sta Ana Mohd Syah Zainudin Letchumi Thamboo Nur Aisyah Ahmad Afandi John Cheah Weng Onn (DB) Parameswary Balakrishnan Nor’Aliza Ilyasa Sangheeta Kuppusamy Noor Aida Mohamed (DB) Tony Haryadi Irman

The intense teamwork and fun made us ravenous and we made a beeline for the lunch buffet at the coffee house. While some retired to the rooms for a siesta, others took a short tour to the turtle sanctuary nearby the resort. The sanctuary was housed in a Malay-styled house on stilts with its backyard turned into a hatchery for breeding and rearing turtles, where we were enlightened on the protection of the endangered species especially the leatherback turtle and viewed an exhibition on the different types of turtles, their habitats and locations, alongside exotic seashells on display. We also made a pit stop at a row of stalls selling various keropoks before heading back to the resort.

During the dinner, Suriati Dalilan from the Finance Department entertained us as the master of ceremony and rendered several songs. The Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Chin Oy Sim gave a short speech and handed out lucky draw prizes. Senior staff members were also called upon to distribute lucky draw prizes to the winners. As the live band belted out songs from several generations, many took to the floor and enjoyed themselves well past midnight.

We left Cherating after having breakfast and checking out at about noon. The trip back was less noisy as many slept in the bus having had a wonderful trip.

The staff trip was organised by the Fun Club of Bar Council Secretariat comprising Cheryl Foo (Chairperson), Saliha Hassan, Ezane Mansor, Anne Andrew, Siti Rokiah Morshid, Geraldine Chye and Sumitha Shaanthinni Kishna.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 47 Lifestyle

Berjaya Times Square Theme Park: Out of this World Kind of Fun

by Razlina Razali

Located within Berjaya Times Square shopping mall, Berjaya Times Square Theme Park is tagged as the largest indoor, all weather, all age, entertainment destination in the region. It is the country’s biggest multi-level indoor amusement park ever built inside a mall. As reported in the local media, Berjaya Times Square Theme Park ranked top three theme parks in Malaysia (New Straits Times, 31 May 2011).

Situated in the downtown of Kuala Lumpur, getting there is very convenient. For those who like the public transport, the monorail service stops right in front of this very building and for you who likes to drive, the Smart Tunnel will lead you straight to Berjaya Times Square.

The Theme Park is said to be built by the fictitious mad scientist, Professor Cosmo and his clumsy robot assistant, Ooort. The 133,000 square feet Theme Park is a world of its own. You’ll be transported into a galaxy far, far away with all the rich assortment of entertainment and rides the moment you step in.

Designed for adults and teenagers, Galaxy Station offers six rides for the thrill-seekers out there. For all the roller coasters’ addicts, you can get your fix on its seven-storey roller coaster, the Supersonic Odyssey for a rolling good time. The Spinning Orbit will give you the adrenaline rush and out- of-control swinging time, and the DNA Mixer will leave you super giddy when you land back on your feet. The other three rides, Space Attack, Ooort’s Express and Dizzy Izzy will have you spinning, soaring and twirling up to dizzying heights.

The Theme Park is also suitable for family outings. Fantasy Garden is a world of endless exploration and imagination with lively imaginary cartoons, gigantic plants and creatures that will have kids spellbound for hours. You and your kids

48 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Lifestyle

could ride on eight fun rides Bumble Bee and Honey Bump. Definitely amidst the beautiful scenery a kiddie land like no other! and colourful Garden Avenue. Take mild rides in After the fun exhilarating rides, thrills and Botanic Drive, Fantasy Trail adventures, you can cool down with family and Crazy Bus that will genre movies that are played in the Kidz take you around for your Theatre. Drinks and snacks are available fantasy exploration. For all around the Theme Park to quench your the traditional merry-go- thirst and fill your hunger so that you can round, Buddy Go Round is start all over again. The fun never stops at the thing to go around on. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park. To heighten up the level of excitement, Fantasy Garden These are not the only things that the has in store Robo Crash, Theme Park offers. The Theme Park brings Molly-Cool’s Swing, Flying you the Birthday Party Package that will not only blow the candles away but every kid attending the birthday bash. With games, prizes, fun rides in the Theme Park and more, your kid can have a birthday to remember.

The Corporate Group Packages accommodate the Family Day Package and Team Building Package. Creating a bonding sessions amongst colleagues in a theme park environment is very out-of- the-box.

In Berjaya Times Square Theme Park, the fun and thrill never ends, rain or shine, because the best part is, it is indoor. Plus, for the avid shoppers, after the adrenaline- pumping experience, you can have a session of retail therapy in the mall. The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association by Sathish Ramachandran

The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association (“TMMTA”) There are close to 600 Middle Templars in Malaysia. We are held its Inaugural Annual General Meeting on 30 Apr 2011 in privileged to have had three Middle Templars as former Heads Kuala Lumpur and members present elected TMMTA’s General of the Malaysian Judiciary; Tun Mohamed Suffian b Mohamed Committee for 2011/2012: Hashim, Tun Mohamed Salleh b Abbas and Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin b Haji Abdullah. President : YABhg Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin b Haji Abdullah Deputy President : YBhg Tan Sri Datuk Cecil Abraham Middle Temple Societies have been registered in Bahamas, Secretary : Sathish Ramachandran Mauritius and Hong Kong, and TMMTA is the first to be formed Treasurer : Low Weng Tchung in a non-island nation. We have established contact with these Middle Temple Societies and we have a very good working Committee Members: relationship with the Middle Temple Secretariat in London. • Yang Arif Hakim Dr Prasad Abraham • YBhg Dato’ M Rajasekaran If you are a Middle Templar in Malaysia, please contact Sathish • Honey Tan Lay Ean Ramachandran for information and updates on TMMTA by email • Rodney Khor Say Aun at [email protected]. • Charlaine Adrienne Chin Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 49 Lifestyle

Luxurious Breezy Drive for The Executive and Family

by Syamsuriatina Ishak

Last month, I had the pleasure of test- I thought the Teana’s engine performed • Triple meter cluster with integrated driving Tan Chong Motor’s executive very well due to its impressive acceleration Multi Information Display luxury sedan, the Nissan Teana. They and gear shifts, and it remained stable • SRS airbags, ABS, EBD and Brake provided me with the newly launched throughout the uphill North Perak highway Assist. 2.0L variant with Aerokit and a built-in journey while equally smooth and receptive • VDC with traction control Multimedia Navigation System. Since I in our drive through rural untarred roads. • Xenon headlights faced a weekend of outstation nuptials, One thing that struck me very clearly was • best-in-class trunk space with a which required my family to travel all the how quiet the inner “sanctum” of the capacity of 506L way from KL to Taiping in North Perak for car was, which became obvious when a relative’s wedding (ferrying the groom we had to open the automatic window I thought it was unfortunate that the for his “I dos”) and then popping in to at a busy intersection. Tan Chong Motors 2.0L variant did not come with the simple Ipoh for a lawyer-friend’s wedding, it was attributes this to Teana’s Noise, Vibration feature of cruise control or DVD player, indeed a blessing to have the comfort and & Harshness (NVH) feature. however, did conclude that it was a good excellent handling of the Teana at our buy, comparative to other vehicles within disposal. The penultimate mother-of-all features its class such as the Toyota Camry and was its impressive fuel consumption for Honda Accord. From the get go, my family and I were a vehicle of its class, since we travelled impressed by the spacious and tastefully over 750km on 1½ tank full of petrol. The Nissan Teana is available in 3 variants decorated interior. The six of us travelled Powering the all-new Teana are all- - the 2.0L and 2.5L V6 that are assembled the extensive journey in comfort, having aluminium 2.0L MR20DE engine (136PS in Tan Chong Motor’s state-of-the-art found the enveloping leather seats most at 5600rpm; 190Nm at 4400rpm), mated Serendah Plant, and the Teana 3.5L V6 that cozy in addition to the dual-zone auto air- to Nissan’s Xtronic CVT (Continuously is fully imported from Japan. It is offered conditioning system. Variable Transmission) with Adaptive Shift with a choice of eight attractive exterior Control (ASC). The Teana leaflet vaunts colours: Deep Amethyst Grey, Tungsten Like a child in a candy store, my hubby that these technologies combine to offer Silver, Sapphire Black, Chardonnay Gold and I were taken by Teana’s new feature, responsive acceleration and class-leading and Brilliant White, wherein Pearl White, the Multimedia Navigation system utilising fuel economy while allowing passengers Bordeaux Red and Luna Blue are exclusive a 7-inch wide screen with bluetooth to enjoy a comfortable ride with no shift to the teana 3.5L V6. handsfree phone system. My kids shock at any vehicle speeds. ooh-ed and aah-ed upon watching us On-the-road prices (inclusive of insurance, use the reverse camera with night vision Notable features of the 2.0L are: road tax, registration fee and ownership compensation to maneuver the vehicle. • Engine Start/Stop Button claim fee) for Peninsular Malaysia are as The car also boasted a 6-CD changer • Dual-zone auto air-conditioning follows: Nissan Teana 2.0L Comfort: with 6 speaker audio, AUX-in, USB, MP3 system RM141,000, the 2.0L Luxury: RM145,000, and video play capabilities via SD card • 6-CD changer with 6 speaker audio, the 2.5L V6 Premium: RM173,000 and with excellent FM receiver, which kept us AUX-in and MP3 the fully-imported, Japan CBU 3.5L V6 entertained throughout the long journey. • Interior mood lighting Exquisite will retail for RM248,500.

50 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Lifestyle

Executive Health Screening at Ijn

The advancement of technology has Part of the initiative is the Executive The ESP is also recommended for those revolutionized our workspaces so much Screening Programme (ESP), which is who have never undergone any thorough that almost everything we need to get our essentially a medical check-up with the health examination before. jobs done is only an arm’s length away. important distinction that it is designed The facilities can increase our productivity, with a special focus on the heart. The ESP The IJN team is also very concerned about but are they good for our health? Probably can detect early signs of heart disease, young urban professionals, whose work and not, doctors say. especially coronary artery disease. lifestyles may include regularly entertaining clients after office hours, resulting in a lack Modern life has made us sedentary. Most The package includes blood tests for of rest and time for exercise. of our correspondence is done via email haemoglobin, blood cell count, cholesterol, or fax, so there is no need to walk to the blood sugar, kidney function, electrolytes Coupled with high-stress jobs, the health post office. Bills and money transfers can and uric acid. Doctors will also run a chest risks of constant after-work entertaining now be done online, saving us the trip to X-ray, ECG, urine and lung functions test, are exacerbated by smoking and excessive the bank. and will check for high blood pressure, consumption of alcohol. diabetes, gout, lung problems as well as And since public and private sector kidney and urinary problems. These are all detrimental to the heart, and departments are connected by telephone unfortunately the growing numbers of extension numbers, there is no reason for Additional tests can be done to detect other people exposed to these risks are young us to walk away from our desks other than illnesses. These include the cancer test professionals aged in their thirties. to go to the washroom and cafeteria. (Carcino Embryonic Antigen for women and Prostatic Specific Antigen for men), With early detection, we have a better The team at IJN is very concerned about Venereal Disease Research Laboratory-Slide chance of effective treatment, which goes these new trends. Physical inactivity is Test (VDRL), hepatitis, thyroid function, a long way towards the prevention of one of the most common risk factors for and liver function tests, as well as blood future problems. Ideally, we should have heart disease, and a significant number of grouping and anti-HIV tests. ourselves screened once a year. Malaysians working in urban centres are at risk. Results for these will produced and The IJN team strongly urges those who fit explained by a doctor on the same day, the above profile to register for the ESP. What’s more, with long working hours and a comprehensive medical report will Remember, early detection saves lives and and many more spent sitting in traffic, one follow in the mail. Everyone is welcome money. hardly has time to exercise. In fact, most of to have themselves checked under the ESP, us do not exercise at all. but IJN especially encourages working men IJN is now extending corporate rates for aged over 30 and women over 35 to take the ESP, exclusively to the Members of the Doctors are not only concerned about the tests. Malaysian Bar. For more information or to physical inactivity in the office, they are also make an appointment, please contact the worried about the effects of work-related Doctors believe that it is best that screening IJN ESP Centre at 03-2600 6423 or esp@ stress, which contributes to heart disease be conducted earlier in one’s life and more ijn.com.my as well as diabetes. regularly, particularly for those who are more at risk. These include those with To address these issues, the IJN team family history of heart disease, hypertension is conducting an on-going awareness and diabetes. programme targeted especially at young urban professionals.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 51 Lifestyle

At Home With Nature by Azman Thaiyub Khan and photos by “Geng Terjah”

This issue of Praxis follows eight gutsy which Rafidah is an expert in. Outings The first step into nature excursions ladies who call themselves “Geng that initially surrounded rivers around began in 2007 for Zela when she was Terjah”. Known to seek the mysteries the town of Kuantan, quickly led to full still in practice. Attending a legal aid of nature with minimal experience and blown hiking activities leading them to awareness programme organised by no supervision, these ladies have quickly their now sacred sanctuary, the 7 floors Pahang Bar Committee at Pulau Tioman, become legends in their own right by high water fall at Maran, Pahang which she met Amalia and Rafidah. Considering challenging themselves to new heights was discovered by Zela and Amalia by the sheer size of the state of Pahang, the with each new experience. trekking with no prior planning or maps or programme had been divided to East guides and armed with only their instincts Pahang and West Pahang and Zela says “Geng Terjah” aptly named due to their in the jungle. Once both were familiar that it was her “daredevil” attitude that drive to try anything and everything and with the trek and comfortable leading helped her make friends and adjust, since walk every path there is, is made up of others, they led the others in the group she didn’t know many people as she four lawyers – Amalia Mohd Said, Noor to this waterfall. Since then, these ladies had recently moved from Temerloh to Jehan Bakar, Rafidah Abdul Aziz and Nurul have been unofficially leading the path Kuantan. In between the programmes, Aznie Ibrahim, state legal advisor Zela Azni to others who might want to experience Zela, Amalia and Rafidah spent their Binti Nahizan, business analyst Aaleema this magnificent creation of nature. Zela time together kayaking, snorkeling and Ssolbiah Binti Abd Kadir, dietitian Rozalina says that they have many times led lawyers hiking at Pulau Tioman, as it would be Idris and Pahang Bar Executive Officer, from Seremban and Kuala Lumpur to their style from then on, without prior Noor Hashikin Hamsah. “We just bulldoze picnics and treks which is a cheap way to planning, without guides or life jackets our way, hence the name” says Zela. enjoy nature and have a break from the and sometimes even without their wallets! Originally a foursome, Zela, Amalia, Jehan day to day hectic lifestyles that most lead. Since then true to their “terjah” attitudes, and Rafidah would join any and every Zela says she has always advocated that they have been snorkeling, scuba diving, “heavy duty” activity they came across a vacation need not necessarily mean jungle trekking and caving together, not including many conservation activities due spending big bucks and going overseas. to mention mountaineering, kayaking and to Jehan’s Vice Presidency with Malaysian She finds that the opportunity to see numerous trips to many waterfalls. Nature Society. the sunrise, to experience the glorious waterfalls, to stand over panoramic hills In fact they have a impressive list of All experienced swimmers except for and experience the wonders of old mines achievements to their names from ATV to Aznie, they enjoy water related activities at historical Sungai Lembing is an equally camping at Jerangkang waterfalls, Pahang, immensely and this includes kayaking, satisfying vacation that most would enjoy. Berkelah waterfalls, Pahang, 2nd Bay Teluk

52 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Lifestyle

Chempedak, Pahang and Ulu Muda, Kedah; Caving at Dark Caves, Gombak, Gua Charas, Pahang, Gua Senyum, Pahang, Gua Jebak Puyuh, Pahang, Gua Kelam, Perlis, Gua Ulu Muda, Kedah and Gua Beserah, Pahang; Fireflies and Turtle Conservation trips at Pahang; Cycling at Sungai Lembing, Pahang; Hiking to Ulu Muda, Kedah, Berkelah waterfalls, Pahang, Jerangkang waterfalls, Pahang, Bukit Panorama, Bukit Sekilau, Bukit Pelindung, 2nd Bay Teluk Chempedak, Pahang, Lata Meraung , Jerantut and FRIM, Kepong; Kayaking at Sungai Cherating, Pahang, Pulau Perhentian, Terengganu; Mountaineering to Gunung Ledang, Johor, Gunung Berembun, Terengganu, Gunung Datuk, Negeri Sembilan, Gunung Bunga Buah, Pahang, Gunung Nuang, Selangor, Gunung Liang, Perak, Gunung Tahan, Pahang, Gunung Tapis, Pahang, Gunung Irau, Pahang and Gunung Angsi, Negeri Sembilan; Repelling at Gua Senyum, Pahang; Snorkelling and Swimming at Pulau Tioman, Pahang, Pulau Perhentian, Terengganu, Pulau Ular, Pahang, Berkelah waterfalls, Jerangkung waterfalls, Chamang waterfalls, Lata Meraung waterfalls, Pahang and Chemerong waterfalls, Terengganu.

Zela and the ladies have no intention of slowing down and as long as age and health permits, they intend to seek new and challenging activities. In fact, they already have a list of places they would like to venture and activities they would like to take on like ATV at Bali, Indonesia, camping at Lata Naning, Bentong, Pahang and Lubuk Petai, Negeri Sembilan, caving at the mysterious and eco-rich Gua Kota Gelanggi, Pahang, kayaking at Royal Belum state park, mountaineering to Gunung Kinabalu, Gunung Korbu, Gunung Rajah, Gunung Tahan, Gunung Gayong, Gunung Chamah, Gunung Ulusepah, Guning Yong Yap and Gunung Yong Belar, some of which are over 7000 feet high and relatively unchartered.

The ladies also plan to go snorkeling and swimming locally at Pulau Redang, Pulau Tenggol and also to Pulau Weh in Indonesia. Zela also has a wish list of trying to be a licenced scuba diver and a Green Badge, which is a nature guide licence, in addition to training for CPR and lifesaving skills.

The ladies say that by mixing with other outdoor groups like Outdoor Booster, Orang Gunung Kuala Lumpur (OGKL), Gunung Online and Geng Santai, they have learnt that there is much more to the activities that they were doing as impromptu activities. Once the type to up and climb a hill or walk straight into jungles, they have also learnt to be responsible adults and report to authorities and obtain the necessary permits and use guides where appropriate. Where such activities are concerned, it is important to have knowledge of the laws of the jungle and also some first aid tips. The ladies say that discipline is extremely important in the jungle and most times picking up rubbish and planting saplings are a major part of their activity. They assert the importance of preserving nature is of utmost importance whilst enjoying their activities. One always has to realise that there is no rubbish collection services up at 7,000 feet above sea level and therefore whatever is left behind only serves to ruin the natural beauty of nature. They have also learnt the importance of separating garbage and burying biodegradable rubbish so as to prevent the spreading of Leptospirosis, which is brought by rats. Zela recounts of the time at Gunung Tahan when Amalia and herself brought down 8 days and 7 nights worth of rubbish down with them to be disposed at the Taman Negara dumpsters.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 53 Lifestyle

When asked how such activities have changed them and their outlook in life and practice in general, the ladies are wistful in their replies. They say that having had the opportunity to experience all the activities that they have undertaken thus far, it has made them strong and confident individuals. Zela says that they have learnt a lot about life in general and living. The ladies say that such activities that expose them to the elements bring them a realisation of just how small human beings are in this universe and that is a humbling experience. The ladies feel that after having gone through such experiences and undertaken such activities, the stress of a demanding work day is something that they can handle with ease and does not overwhelm them. Nowadays, they consistently find themselves comparing the challenges of life with the challenges that they have faced and find that there are not many unknown and unimaginable challenges that they can’t face or handle.

Zela and the ladies also feel that one does not have to spend thousands or ringgit and travel abroad to have a decent holiday when all that is necessary is available in our own backyards. They constantly recommend nature holidays to anyone who will care to listen and if extreme activities are not their cups of tea then a conservation holiday like Clean Earth might just be it.

Geng Terjah have indeed found a very effective way to relieve their work stress and bond with nature. The Praxis editorial team congratulates them for making the time to have so much fun and urge more Members to emulate their example.

54 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Sports Tripartite Bar Games 2011 and Interstate Bar Golf Tournament 2011 (16 and 17 Sept 2011) Compiled by Anis Taufik from web reports by Chong Ee Lin, K Puspalingam and Sumitha Shaanthinni Kishna

The Tripartite Bar Games, between In the mixed doubles, MB beat AAS by The teams and players were then divided the Malaysian Bar (“MB”), Advocates’ 21-11 and 21-7. into their respective lanes before the Association of Sarawak (“AAS”) and tournament began. All players could be Sabah Law Association (“SLA”), was held The third men’s doubles between AAS seen concentrating on their games. The at Penang, on 16 and 17 Sept 2011. Five and SLA was fast paced and both teams looks of despair on players’ faces could sports were played amongst the three were forced into a rubber set to determine easily be seen each time they did not contingents, ie badminton, football, golf, the winner of the game. After fighting manage to drop any pins or when their bowling and cross country run. tooth and nail, the game was eventually balls rolled into the gutter. High fives were won by AAS with the commendable also exchanged on a frequent basis. MB Victory Start! scores of 18-21, 21-8 and 21-12. After all five games ended, the MB team The teams arrived early in full spirits In the veteran category, the MB team won was proudly declared champion, with a and friendly greetings were exchanged against AAS with the score of 21-13 and total of 4,695 pin falls. This was followed amongst team members before the games 21-4. by the AAS team, with a total of 3,467 started. After the group photograph was pin falls, and SLA, with a total of 2,856 taken, the players did some warm up The games went on into late afternoon. pin falls. exercises. The first sports event of the Supporters from respective teams gave Tripartite Bar Games, badminton, began their full support by cheering and clapping Dayana from MB was the winner of the then. each time their team mates scored a point. ladies high series, while Alvin Neo, also from MB, was the winner of the men’s The first match was between MB and The MB team emerged as the winner of high series. AAS. The match ended with the MB team this year’s badminton event! winning by a score of 21-7 and 21-6. The trophies for the ladies and men’s Credit must be given to the AAS team for MB “Bowls Over” AAS and SLA! high game went to Suhaila from AAS and their efforts. Jeyakumar from MB, respectively. Even though the bowling tournament The second men’s doubles match, started 30 minutes behind the scheduled Lim Chee Wee, President of MB, was also between SLA and AAS, was hard fought. time, the players could be seen happily there to lend his support. However, the match was won by the AAS mingling around and joking with one team with the score of 21-13 and 21-16. another. It was indeed a good start to a It was indeed a fun filled event! wonderful game.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 55 Sports

Golf Tournament for the Tripartite Bar Azuan (38 points), Anuar Hafiz (37 points), Games 2011 and Interstate Bar Golf K Puspalingam (37 points) and Redzuan Tournament 2011 (34 points).

The golf tournament for the Tripartite Bar The top scorer of the tournament was Games 2011 and the Interstate Bar Golf Song Kok Ful, who amassed 39 stable ford Tournament 2011 were jointly organised points, thus winning the RR Mahendran by the Bar Council Sports Committee and Memorial Challenge Trophy! Penang Bar at Cinta Sayang Golf Resort, Sungai Petani, Kedah, on 17 Sept 2011. The novelties were won by the following:

In the absence of a golf team from SLA, Nearest to Pin: Bexter Michael (AAS) the golf tournament for the Tripartite Bar Muhammad Azuan (MB) Games was held between MB and AAS. Nearest to Line: Mohd Sabri Pin (MB) The eight players of the AAS team were set against a formidable MB team that Longest Drive: Christopher Leong (MB) comprised 44 golfers. Hence, it was agreed that for the purpose of determining the The Bar Council Sports Committee would winner, the stable ford points of the like to extend its heartfelt thanks to Lee AAS team’s eight players against eight Guan Tong, Organising Chairperson of designated players of the MB team would the Tripartite Bar Games; Beldev Singh be taken. Accordingly, the stable ford Bhar, Tournament Coordinator; Abdul points of the first, third, fifth, seventh, Majid Md Yusof, Tournament Director; the ninth, 11th, 13th and 15th players, based team captains of all state bar committees; on the overall position of the MB team’s participants; sponsors; and finally, Balan players, were taken for the computation. and Kesevan of Cinta Sayang Golf Resort MB amassed 287 points against AAS’s for all their assistance. 244 points. As a result, MB was declared winner, taking home the coveted Tan Sri Golf is a game of lovely frolics. Steve Shim Golf Challenge Trophy! Tripartite Bar Games Gala Dinner As for the Interstate Golf Tournament, with the inclusion of the Sarawak team, The Tripartite Bar Games 2011 drew to a there were also teams from Kuala Lumpur, close with a dinner hosted by Penang Bar Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak at the Bayview Beach Resort on 17 Sept and Selangor. The Selangor team won the 2011. event by scoring 185 stable ford points based on their top five players’ scores. Lim Chee Wee, President of MB, The host, Penang, was the runner-up with started off the evening with a speech 175 points, and the second runner-up was congratulating the MB team for emerging Negeri Sembilan, with 170 points. as champions in all the games played. He stated that the Tripartite Bar Games 2011 The top scorers for the Selangor team was historical as it was the first time that were Song Kok Ful (39 points), Mohd the games coincided with Malaysia Day,

56 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Sports

which is celebrated on 16 Sept 2011. Furthermore, it was also the first time that MB, AAS and SLA had issued a joint press statement calling upon the Prime Minister of Malaysia to make good his promise to repeal arbitrary detention legislations and to subject proposed alternative legislations to public debate and consultation. MB, AAS and SLA had met for a Tripartite Meeting on the morning of 16 Sept 2011.

Lim Chee Wee also highlighted that the that AAS’s commitment to the games was Golf games, revived in Miri in 2008 after a commendable as they had even trained seven year hiatus, reflected the strength Teams Points (Stable after tarawih prayers during the month ford) and tie amongst the three Bars. He of Ramadhan. He shared that Leonard pointed out that the results of the games Shim, Vice-President of AAS, would be MB 287 were insignificant in comparison to the the organising Chairperson of the Bench AAS 244 fact that they had brought together the and Bar Games 2012, which will be held Points: MB = 3 • AAS = 2 • SLA = 0 members of the three Bars to put forth in Kuching, Sarawak. AAS was looking their best in the spirit of sportsmanship forward to welcoming SLA and MB. and camaraderie. He also commended Cross Country Penang Bar for their efficient organisation The three Bars exchanged souvenirs Teams Men’s Women’s Total of the games. He thanked all Members for and the trophy for the overall champion Points Points Points the fond memories and looked forward to was presented to K Mohan and Anand MB 59 49 108 the three Bars working together. Ponnudurai, Co-Chairpersons of the Bar Council Sports Committee. The much AAS 42 26 68 Roger Chin, Honorary Secretary, Executive awaited “boat race” event took place SLA o 39 39 Committee of SLA, gave a speech on with AAS beating SLA and MB. In the Points: MB = 3 • AAS = 2 • SLA = 1 behalf of the GBB Nandy @ Gaanesh, second round, the “boat race” drew to a President of SLA, who had to leave much tie as one of the AAS members had not Bowling earlier for a prior appointment. Roger Chin overturned his mug on the table. The discussed that the Tripartite Bar Games third round was won by AAS on the sole Teams Pin Falls was a highlight in their calendar to meet strength of Sarbjit Singh Khaira, Honorary MB 4695 lawyers from Peninsular Malaysia in a more Secretary of AAS. informal manner. Although the SLA team AAS 3467 was second runner-up, he stated that the Members were entertained late into the SLA 2856 friendship forged during the games was night by a group called High Society as Points: MB = 3 • AAS = 2 • SLA = 1 most valued. He cited an example where a they tucked into a delicious eight-course Sabah member of the bowling team who Chinese dinner. Ladies High Men High Series had no bowling experience was taught Series – Dayana – Alvin Neo (MB) how to bowl impromptu by members from Tripartite Bar Games 2011 Overall (MB) – 692 – 1104 the AAS and MB teams. As with the joint Results Ladies High Men High Game press statement, he urged the three Bars Game – Suhaila – Jeyakumar to stand together in unison on important Football (AAS) – 151 (MB) – 244 public interest issues. He thanked Penang Games Score Bar and MB for their hospitality and stated Points Tally that he was looking forward to hosting MB vs AAS 6-0 Games MB AAS SLA AAS and MB teams at the next Tripartite MB vs SLA 5-2 Bar Games. Football 3 2 1 AAS vs SLA 3-1 Badminton 3 2 1 Khairil Azmi b Mohd Hasbie, President Points: MB = 3 • AAS = 2 • SLA =1 of AAS, revealed in his speech that his Golf 3 2 0 team members were excited to participate Badminton Cross Country 3 2 1 in the games as they were very keen to Games Score Bowling 3 2 1 visit Penang. He added that the Tripartite Meeting was a good informal platform MB vs AAS 4-1 Total 15 10 4 for the three Bars to discuss issues related MB vs SLA 5-0 to their respective practices openly and AAS vs SLA 3-2 frankly. He noted that AAS were on the same page with MB on matters of national Points: MB = 3 • AAS = 2 • SLA = 1 interest and human rights. He explained

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 57 State Bar News

State Bar News (June-Sept 2011)

Contributions by State Bar Secretariats and Committee Members

Kedah/Perlis Bar Committee Malaysia and two children of the Kuala and a blind trail. The children were broken Lumpur Bar members. up into groups, and at the end of the On 22 Sept 2011, the Kedah/Perlis Bar, night walk, they were blindfolded and led in collaboration with Kangar Courts and A host of activities were planned for the by a facilitator to the four stations manned Jabatan Bantuan Guaman Perlis, organised children and five facilitators. The activities by UMT students. The children had to use a “Jamuan Hari Raya” at Kangar Court kicked off at 3:30 pm, on 3 June 2011 their senses of touch, smell, taste and Complex. The event took place from with a camp briefing by Sharmilah, an sound to guess what the items presented 12:00 pm to 3:00 pm. education officer at FRIM. The children to them were. were then broken up into five groups for Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee an “ice-breaker” session. Five biodiversity Day 2 of the camp started with a morning students from University of Malaya exercise and nature walk, in which the On 3 to 5 June 2011, the Kuala Lumpur Terengganu (“UMT”) joined Sharmilah to children were educated on the different Bar Environmental and Humanities help organise activities for the camp. types of trees and wildlife available at Committee (“EHC”) organised a three- FRIM. Terence Ang, a bird expert from day, two-night children’s nature camp Noor Hajran, Deputy Chairperson of EHC, Malaysian Nature Society (“MNS”) joined at Forest Research Institute Malaysia joined the camp at 4:30 pm to educate the the camp on Day 2. The nature walk (“FRIM”), Kepong. The objective of the children on the 3Rs with a very interactive included a trip to a waterfall where the camp was to educate young children slide presentation. To her surprise, the children were treated to a picnic. They on the importance of preserving and children were already aware of the 3Rs also had a fun time splashing about in the safeguarding the environment. The camp and were excited to learn what else they waterfall! was attended by a total of 20 children: 18 could do. Day 1 of the camp ended with children from Yayasan Kebajikan Psikologi a night walk that included a senses game

58 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 State Bar News

After lunch, the next agenda was stream 2011. Hidden in a corner of Bukit Nanas, On 18 June 2011, KLYLC and the sampling, where the children were given away from the hustle bustle of Kuala Kuala Lumpur Bar Social, Arts and nets to catch some species in the stream. Lumpur, stood a colonial building 35 Culture Committee jointly organised an Amongst the wildlife caught were fishes, women proudly called home. introductory dragon boat workshop. prawns, crabs and various water insects. Since then, there have been further The children were then taught how to The group arrived at 9:00 am and was dragon boating sessions. The response to calculate the number of species that greeted by Sister Betty, the caretaker of these dragon boating sessions, all held at could be found in the stream, in addition Asrama Cahaya. She explained that most the Putrajaya Maritime Centre, has been to measuring the water’s pH, oxygen, of the residents of Asrama Cahaya had very positive. A team was also formed turbidity (clarity) and temperature levels. been there since they were born and had to compete in a competition in October After a tea break, the children, facilitators been abandoned as babies due to their 2011. and UMT students played games related disabilities. While they were dependent to the environment. on the donations and goodwill of many Dragon boating is a sports whose origins to run Asrama Cahaya, the residents were can be traced back by more than a After dinner, it was time for group taught to be self-sufficient and self-reliant. thousand years. With very Asian origins, discussion and the children were divided She explained that on weekdays, they drawing from Chinese legends as well as into several groups. They were given large worked in their craft room to make rugs, Asian fishermen, dragon boating is now sheets of paper and marker pens. The blankets and bags to raise funds for the a global sport with more than 50 million purpose of this activity was for them to home. dragon boaters worldwide. Its distinctive come up with a presentation on what they features are the brightly coloured dragon had done and learned over two days at The group was then introduced to the heads attached to the front of the boats, the camp. wonderful residents of Asrama Cahaya. along with long scales and a tail. With a Many of them suffered from mental drummer seated at front of the boat, the On Day 3, Terence Ang and Eileen Chiang disabilities and they kept themselves beating of the drum signifies the dragon’s from MNS gave a presentation on hornbill occupied by playing jigsaw puzzles. The heartbeat as the dragon boat races across nesting sites. The children then used residents welcomed the group with open the water. pebbles and paint to make souvenirs to arms, and were more than eager to share take home. their puzzles with their newfound friends. At the introductory workshop for the paddlers, a boat of 18 complete The camp ended with a certificate Other residents were eager to share newcomers jumped straight into the presentation ceremony by Brendan Navin their stories and showcase their singing history, the culture, as well as all the Siva, Chairman of the Kuala Lumpur talents while others were keen to pass on techniques behind dragon boating. Bar, to the children and facilitators. The their “de-threading” skills, which were The introductory words given to the facilitators and children in turn surprised accompanied by a medley of hymns, newcomers were “We are not rowers. We Sharmilah and the UMT students with a nursery rhymes and Christmas carols. are paddlers”. With that, the newcomers “recycled” thank you card. Also present went through a fun and intensive crash at the ceremony were Roger Chan, It was very touching to see how close course on how to paddle a dragon boat! Chairperson of EHC, and Ho Sai Meng, and helpful the residents were with each Secretary General of Yayasan Kebajikan other. It was inspiring to witness how As a team sport, the essential element Psikologi Malaysia. they had learnt to make the best out of of dragon boating was being able to their circumstances and find joy in the channel teamwork into achieving perfect The three days at the camp were truly simple things in life. The warmth and synchronisation. Thus, various drills were enjoyable, especially for the children affection that emanated from Asrama carried out (often with groans of pain by who were extremely inquisitive to find Cahaya was not only restricted to the the paddlers), emphasising how every out more about nature and what they residents, but shared with all those single paddler had to work as a team. could do to help. Not only had the camp present that day. Seeing how receptive Every paddler had to watch out for their help create awareness of the need to the residents were to the group, the so- team mates, trust in their team mates preserve and safeguard the environment called “strangers”, showed how much just and not let anyone down. Any clash of and nature, but it also brought about a a little companionship meant to them. paddles, mistiming or even a pause in strong sense of camaraderie between the paddling due to fatigue could cause one’s children and facilitators; they were sad to The end of the group’s visit was signalled boat to slow down! bid each other farewell and promised to by the lunch bell, and they left with heavy keep in touch. hearts. The residents reluctantly bade After the introductory workshop the group farewell, blowing goodbye to lay down the foundation for the On 11 June 2011, a group comprising kisses and repeatedly reminding them to paddlers, regular training sessions were members of Kuala Lumpur Bar Young return soon. It suffices to say that the implemented. The fledgling Kuala Lumpur Lawyers Committee (“KLYLC”) and two hours spent at Asrama Cahaya left Bar Dragon Boat Team now holds regular various Members of the Bar descended quite an impression on all members of the Sunday training sessions at 9:00 am to upon Asrama Cahaya, one of the homes group. Even as they left the home, they 12:30 pm, at the Putrajaya Maritime selected for the KLYLC Charity Night had begun planning their next visit there. Centre. The team’s goal is to train for

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 59 State Bar News

The participants were required to protect the balloons tied to their legs, whilst at the same time try to burst the other teams’ balloons.

Though the children’s energy level was amazing (and seemingly never-ending), it was apparent that KLYLC members and volunteers were exhausted after the Mini Amazing Race and balloon fight. Everyone proceeded to have lunch, which was kindly sponsored by Arni Ariffin, Spice of India and Bisou. Many members of the group used the meal time as an opportunity to chat with the children and get to know them better. They discovered that some of the children had amazing talents despite the difficulties they faced in life. One good example was a little girl named Renu, who mesmerised everyone with her piano playing skills despite her young age.

and compete at the Malaysia International After a short speech by Kenneth Wong, The Bar Council Constitutional Law Dragon Boat Festival, scheduled to be held Chairperson of KLYLC, the organising Committee (“BCCLC”) took over next. at Putrajaya on 20 to 23 Oct 2011. committee started the activities with Led by Firdaus Husni and Joanne Leong, an “ice-breaker” session involving the Co-Deputy Chairpersons of BCCLC, the Ode to Dragon Boaters: children, KLYLC members and volunteers. children were introduced and exposed to The “ice-breaker” session encouraged the Federal Constitution in a fun way ie the My muscles they ache, everyone to mingle and get to know each airing of Rakyat Service Advertisements. My skin is all baked, other better. My butt cheek is bruised, In order to allow KLYLC members and My bones been abused, The organising committee then divided volunteers to spend some quality time with everyone into teams and briefed them the children, the organising committee But I must be insane, about the next activity for the day – decided to allocate a free and easy session Cause despite all the sprains, the Mini Amazing Race. To create a too. During this time, some of the children The blisters and the pain, competitive atmosphere and spice up demonstrated their artistic skills with some I still want to paddle again! the game, each team was required to fabulous drawings to KLYLC members and come up with a team name, appoint a volunteers. On 25 June 2011, KLYLC made a visit to team leader and write their very own Shelter (Home for Children), the second team cheer! Although on the surface The final event for the day was a basketball home selected for KLYLC Charity Night the Mini Amazing Race appeared to be game involving some KLYLC members, 2011. Shelter (Home for Children) has about teams competing against each volunteers and the children. Everyone been in existence since 1981 to help the other to solve puzzles, crack clues and was split into four teams; two teams were abused, abandoned, neglected or at-risk overcome obstacles as quickly as possible, slotted against each other in the basketball children. Shelter (Home for Children) the organising committee’s actual game and another two teams were pitted currently manages three homes: Shelter 1 objective was to educate participants on against each other in a cheerleading (a home for children between the ages of the importance of working in a team, contest. The teams remained competitive four to 12 years old), Shelter 2 (a home for communicating well and working hard throughout, and everyone enjoyed the teenage girls), and Shelter 3 (a home for to overcome obstacles in life. Prizes were sports session. teenage boys). given to the first two teams that succeeded in solving clues and reaching checkpoints It is certain that the memories of this The group of about 30, comprising the fastest. Everyone had a great time visit will remain with all KLYLC members KLYLC members and volunteers, were bonding and solving the puzzles together. and volunteers for a long time. The joy, warmly welcomed when they arrived at the laughter, the cheekiness, the stories, Shelter (Home for Children), in Petaling With everyone in high spirits, the the hidden talents of the children, the Jaya. Whilst waiting for the organising organising team separated everyone into struggles they faced and the constant committee to line up the activities for the new groups again for the next activity – reminder of how fortunate most of us are, day, group members mingled with the a balloon fight! Five teams were divided will definitely be etched in the memories children and listened to their experiences according to their favourite colours, and a of KLYLC members and volunteers. From being in the home. balloon was tied to each participant’s leg. the words of St Francis of Assisi, “Where

60 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 State Bar News

there is charity and wisdom, there is Paiva, remained in the auditorium, while Dipendra and Richard Wee gave their neither fear nor ignorance”. a slightly smaller group, led by Yohendra views from an employer’s perspective. Nadarajan, was ushered to another room. There were also enquiries regarding the On 30 July 2011, KLYLC hosted the development of the proposed Common inaugural dining session themed “Taste During the session, Aston Paiva and Bar Course (“CBC”), which saw HR of the Bar”, with senior Members of Yohendra Nadarajan posed a series of Dipendra giving an insight into the CBC. the Malaysian Bar. Held at Smokehouse, questions to their respective groups that A rather unusual question, perhaps tied to Bangsar, approximately 30 young lawyers resulted in the participants scuffling the popularity of a recent television series across Kuala Lumpur had the opportunity around the room to make their “stand” on mediators, was raised when a student to meet and dine with senior practitioners, on whether they agreed, disagreed or enquired about the mediation process namely Chen Kah Leng, Tommy Thomas, were uncertain of their position in relation and its role in Malaysia, thus prompting Robert Lazar, Ambiga Sreenevasan, Ng to the topics discussed. Some of the Richard Wee to explain the mechanism Sai Yeang, Jennifer Cheong and Marriete questions, such as “Should the death of mediation and how mediation was Peters. The afternoon event was also penalty be abolished?” and “Should perceived among litigants. graced by the presence of former Court preventive detention laws be repealed?”, of Appeal Judge, Justice Datuk Shaik saw an equal number of students taking The final session was a short presentation Daud, who took the time to share his vast the positions of “agree” and “disagree”, entitled “Activism”, by Syahredzan Johan, experience with the young lawyers. thus sparking an interesting exchange of a young lawyer as well as the Chairperson comments during the sessions. of BCCLC. It was a lively and interactive The aim of the dining session was to session that surely inspired students to be provide a platform for junior and senior All participants subsequently congregated more involved in activism work! Members of the Bar to meet and interact at the auditorium for a question-and- with one another. The event began answer session, particularly in respect Each student left the event with not with an opening speech by Yohendra of the legal practice for young lawyers. only invaluable information, but a set of Nadarajan, organising co-chairperson, There, pupils in chambers, young lawyers, the MyConstitution Campaign’s Rakyat followed by a short welcoming note by, not-so-young lawyers, and members of Guides booklets and a copy of the Kenneth Wong, Chairperson of KLYLC. BCCLC – some of whom were students – Pupillage Handbook, courtesy of the Kuala Participants then began their sumptuous introduced themselves before answering Lumpur Bar. three course meal. During the meal, a barrage of questions from the floor. there was a lively exchange of views and The questions that were posed by the On 11 Aug 2011, KLYLC organised its opinions on current legal, political and participants predominantly centred on annual “Majlis Buka Puasa” dinner at social developments in the country, thus working hours, starting salaries and areas Hales Kitchen, Plaza RAH, Kampung allowing senior practitioners to share their of legal practice. Baru. The event aimed to foster closer ties many experiences at the Bar with the between lawyers and pupils during the juniors present. During this session, the committee holy month of Ramadhan. members from the respective committees As the event drew to a close, Aston Paiva, shared their pupillage experience, as well The invitations were sent out to all representing the junior practitioners as experiences as young lawyers. HR members of the Kuala Lumpur Bar present at the dining session, proposed a toast paying tribute to the seniors for their continuing effort in upholding the finer traditions of the Malaysian Bar. This was followed by a toast by Tommy Thomas, who responded on behalf of the senior practitioners present. He urged young lawyers to find passion and inspiration in their work and to always strive towards promoting the rule of law in the country.

On 6 Aug 2011, the annual KLYLC’s “University Visits” series kicked off with its first visit to Advance Tertiary College (“ATC”). The event started at about 10:30 am with an introductory speech by Kenneth Wong, Chairperson of KLYLC.

After the brief speech, the participants, comprising approximately 80 law students, were divided into two groups for an “ice-breaker” session entitled “Where do you stand?”. One group, led by Aston

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 61 State Bar News

and pupils a week prior to the “Majlis was also dubbed the “Charity Month”. headed by Nazriah Shaik Alawdin, Buka Puasa” dinner. With the promise The young lawyers and pupils successfully organised a talk on “Challenges Faced of authentic “kampung” and western organised a blood donation drive and in Property Development”. Four speakers delights at the reasonable rate of RM35 bowling and archery tournament, in consisting of representatives from the per person, guests were spoilt for choice addition to selling movie tickets on the Bar, surveyors, planners and property with a scrumptious buffet comprising a same day! development were invited to speak wide array of mouth-watering cuisines. and present their respective views and Negeri Sembilan Bar Committee experiences. A total of 65 Members and Guests started to arrive at Hales Kitchen non-members attended this event, which from 6:30 pm onwards, and by 7:15 Although free legal aid services are was held at the Bayview Georgetown pm, all the three long tables that were available in our legal aid centres, a large Hotel. prepared for the “Majlis Buka Puasa” number of the public is still ignorant of their were filled up. existence. Therefore, the Law Awareness On 29 June 2011, the Penang Bar Family Programme for 2011 was held at 9:00 am Law Subcommittee, headed by Mohamad Everyone enjoyed the delicacies prepared to 4:30 pm, at Terminal One Shopping Ezri b Abdul Wahab, held a talk on “The for that night together with great company Centre, Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, on Law on Wills: The Islamic Perspective”. The from the members of the Kuala Lumpur 2 and 3 July 2001. Wide publicity for talk was presented by Noordin b Yusoff, Bar and pupils. Many new faces turned up the Law Awareness Programme for 2011 a practising member of the Selangor Bar. for the event, which made it even more was generated involving Mass Media memorable. (Radio 3), distribution of handouts, and On 1 July 2011, a charity auction organised placing banners and buntings at strategic by the Penang Bar Social Subcommittee, Malacca Bar Committee locations. headed by Jo-Anne De Vries, was held at the Farquhar’s Bar of E & O Hotel. The Malacca Young Lawyers and The response from the public was very Several Members of the Bar auctioned of Chambering Pupils Subcommittee good. The public sought advice on all “interesting” items, ranging from dinner organised a “Majlis Buka Puasa cum kinds of cases. About 13 chambering dates to car washes! The auction was a Charity Dinner” on 19 Aug 2011 at students and 15 volunteer lawyers took resounding success as it managed to raise Kings Hotel, Ayer Keroh, Malacca. The part in this event. A total number of 86 RM 10,000 for the Adventist Hospital’s event aimed to bring the members of cases were obtained at the event. Patient Heart Fund and Children’s the Malacca Bar and pupils, as well as Protection Society. This was the third time Multimedia University law students, closer The Negeri Sembilan Bar also sent several a charity auction had been organised by during the holy month of Ramadhan. volunteer Yayasan Bantuan Guaman the Penang Bar. The Penang Bar aims to The event saw the turn out of 68 paying Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) lawyers for a make it a regular event in the name of adults! briefing at 8:30 am to 12:00 pm, at charity with the support of Members. Kings Hotel, Malacca, on 25 June 2011. The subcommittee also organised a The briefing was attended by about 10 After a lapse of nine years, the Penang series of events on 10 Sept 2011 within volunteer lawyers. Bar was invited to co-organise the the complex of Mahkota Parade to raise Quadrangular Games with Penang Judicial funds for charity. It was just one of many Penang Bar Committee and Legal Services, Penang State Legal other planned activities to raise funds and Advisor’s Office and Polis DiRaja Malaysia awareness about giving back to society On 16 June 2011, the Penang Bar (“PDRM”). This grand affair was held for the whole month of September, which Conveyancing Practice Subcommittee, on 16 July 2011 at Universiti Teknologi

62 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 State Bar News

MARA Permatang Pauh. Close to 300 enthusiastic sportsmen and sportswomen participated and challenged for honours (and pride) in futsal, netball, badminton, carom, darts and volleyball. The event was officiated by the then Chief Justice, YABhg Tun Dato Seri Zaki b Tun Azmi. Also present were YA Tan Sri James Intellect Book Marketing Foong, Managing Judge for the Penang Courts and members of the Penang Judiciary. The teams representing the Penang Bar fought hard and placed second for futsal, netball, men’s volleyball (since 1984) and badminton. They finished at third place overall. Needless to say, the teams from the PDRM were just too strong for everyone else!

On 22 and 23 July 2011, the annual Penang-Perak Bar Games were held. Several games, including football, netball, bowling, volleyball, basketball, darts and badminton, were played at various sports venues around the island. It was hoped that the members of the Perak Bar enjoyed the warmth and hospitality of the Penang Bar, who emerged victors again! The Challenge Trophy was brought home by a beaming Simon Tan, Sports Captain of the Penang Bar.

On 5 Aug 2011, a training for approximately 50-odd pupils was held in order to prepare them for the Legal Aid Dock Brief Programme. The training was conducted and supervised by Dev Kumaraendran, Ravi Chandran and Sukhinderpal Singh. The pupils in attendance were predominantly from the latest batch and were therefore in need of guidance, as well as preparation for the Legal Aid Dock Brief Programme.

On the same day, the Penang Bar Syariah Subcommittee held a “Buka Puasa” event with children from the Maahad Tahfiz Darul USED LAW REPORTS (Second Hand Sets) Tahzib home at Masjid Sheikh Eusoff, Penang. The children were also given “duit raya” that had been contributed by Members of the Bar. • Law Reports (Rainbow Series) 1865-2010 RM 49,000.00 On 15 Aug 2011, the Penang Bar hosted a “Majlis Iftar” for the very first time. Members of the Judiciary and judicial officers were • All England Law Reports 1558-2004 invited to break fast during the holy month of Ramadhan. The judges, officers and lawyers, especially non-Muslims ones, were RM 15,000.00 able to find common ground and learn about the practices of • New South Wales Law Reports RM 21,000.00 their Muslim brothers and sisters during the fasting month. - NSWLR 1825-1900 On 16 Aug 2011, Mohamad Ezri b Abdul Wahab, Chairperson - State Reports NSW 1901-1970 of the Penang Bar Islamic Finance Subcommittee, conducted a seminar on “Islamic Banking: A General Perspective” that was - NSWLR 1971-vol. 73 (2011) very well attended by Members. As Islamic banking is picking • Australian Encyclopedia of Forms and up with immense interest and momentum, the necessity of more similar talks has been noted; as such, the Penang Bar is looking Precedents 2nd ed. 18 vols. RM 1,100.00 into organising similar events in the near future. • Australian Company Law Reports 1974-1989 On the same day, the Penang Legal Aid Centre (“PLAC”) joined (15 vols. + Index) RM 1,100.00 Biro Bantuan Guaman for a visit to Penang Prison to offer legal • Halsbury’s Laws of England 3rd ed. 43 vols. advice to the inmates. V Parthipan, Chairperson of the Penang Bar Criminal Law Subcommittee, together with Sukhinderpal Singh RM 2,900.00 and Vitushini Sivakumar, Executive Director of PLAC, represented • Cox Criminal Cases 1813-1941 (31 vols.) the Penang Bar. Due to encouraging response, it was decided that these visits will be held regularly from now on. RM 3,900.00

On 19 Aug 2011, the Penang Bar Syariah Subcommittee 14, 1st Floor, Jalan Bunus Enam, 50100 Kuala Lumpur. embarked on another charitable event entitled “Kurung Biru buat Tel: 03.2693.8260, 03.2698.7005, 03.2694.7206 Fax: 03.2693.1826 Email: [email protected] Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 63 State Bar News

Alia” by visiting Rumah Kanak-kanak Taman Bakti Kepala Batas for a “Buka Puasa” event. Cash donations from Members of the Bar and “baju raya” were presented to the children.

On 9 Sept 2011, the Penang Bar Industrial Law Subcommittee, headed by Navinder Kaur Jessy, successfully organised a seminar on “Handling Dismissal Cases at the Labour Office and Industrial Court”. The seminar was conducted by Ajit Singh Jessy, an experienced practitioner, and Hoe Lean Fatt from the Labour Office.

On 12 Sept 2011, PLAC hosted a tea reception for magistrates sitting at Criminal Courts and chambering pupils as an informal get-together to raise issues and concerns about the current Dock Brief Programme. Three magistrates from the Georgetown Nurazian bt Sharudin and Tuan Nik Mohd Fadli b Nik Azian Courts, as well as the magistrate from Balik Pulau, graciously (Magistrate); “Acquiring Companies” by Chan Chee Woei, spared their time and provided useful and relevant advice to the “Real Property Gains Tax” by Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri pupils as they themselves had been pupils once before. Navinder (“LHDN”); “Drafting Sales & Purchase Agreement” by Ivan Wong; Kaur Jessy, Co-Chairperson of PLAC, and Dev Kumaraendran and “Advocacy & Decorum in Court/Duties of Counsel” by SS Muker; Sukhinderpal Singh attended the event on behalf of the Penang “Bankruptcy Law” by Tejindarpal Kaur; “Remand, Bail & Criminal Bar. Vitushini Sivakumar, Executive Director of PLAC, was also Advocacy” by Amritpal Singh; and “Bringing Home the Message present, together with Salleni Paramasivam, Executive Director of of Human Rights” by Andrew Khoo, were organised. the Penang YBGK office. Participation for all these events was overwhelming. On 15 Sept 2011, the Office Bearers of Bar Council arrived in Penang for a dialogue session with members of the Penang The Selangor Bar further organised an LHDN training session on Bar. They also addressed several important and current issues, “Stamps on Security Documents and Digital Franking System” for including the proposed Combined Rules for both the High Court the benefit of Members. and Subordinate Courts, membership and the setting-up of international law firms in Malaysia. The dialogue session was Selangor Bar’s Malam Suai Mesra was held on 11 June 2011 conducted in a lively and informal manner and was beneficial to at Shah’s Village. This social event was the annual get-together those who attended it. between members of the Selangor Bench and Bar. The theme for the night was “Wild Wild West”. The highlight of the year so far for the Penang Bar was the honour of being chosen to host the Tripartite Games between the The annual Kuala Lumpur vs Selangor Bar Games was hosted Malaysian Bar, Sabah Law Association and Advocates’ Association by the Kuala Lumpur Bar this year. The games played were of Sarawak on 16 and 17 Sept 2011. The dates were chosen badminton, soccer, tennis, netball, volleyball, hockey and golf. to coincide with Malaysia Day and a total of 160 participants Kuala Lumpur Bar was the champion after winning four games. and supporters from peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak arrived in Penang for the two-day event, which culminated in Terengganu Bar Committee the closing dinner on 17 Sept 2011 at the Beach Bayview Resort, Batu Feringghi. The Terengganu Bar, with the assistance of Terengganu Court, held a memorial on 28 July 2011 for the late Tuan Haji Razali b On 24 Sept 2011, the annual Hari Raya Dinner was held at the Hassan who passed away on 27 July 2011 at his hometown in newly-opened Izora Hotel. Aptly-themed “Nostalgia Gemilang Besut, Terengganu. The memorial was held simultaneously with Aidilfitri 2011”, the event saw performances by Dato’ M Nasir the long call event on that day. The late Tuan Haji Razali b Hassan and Shan of Alleycats, together with acclaimed comedian Imuda was once a judicial officer and the last position he held before as emcee. This event saw a turnout of 400 guests, including joining the Malaysian Bar was as the Legal Adviser for the state Members of the Bar, their families, staff and friends. of Negeri Sembilan. He was one of the most senior lawyers in Terengganu and was well known for his generosity in helping the Selangor Bar Committee younger lawyers who sought his advice in adversarial matters. The late Tuan Haji Razali b Hassan will always be remembered by The Selangor Bar hosted, organised and participated in various the Terengganu Bar for his calibre and wit. The Terengganu Bar events over the past three months. truly appreciates the recognisance afforded by YA Dato’ Mohd Yazid b Mustafa who recorded the memorial as part of the court As part of Selangor Bar’s continuing legal education initiative, proceedings. a range of talks and seminars on the following areas, namely “Syariah Law” by Tuan Haji Nordin Yusoff; “Basic Conveyancing Johore Bar Committee, Kelantan Bar Committee, Pahang Practice”, “Procedural & Substantive Laws”, “Rules and Bar Committee & Perak Bar Committee Regulations” by Andrew Wong; “The Domestic Violence Act 1994: Protection for Survivors” by Honey Tan Lay Ean, ASP No contributions received within editorial deadline.

64 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 • Suit • Blazer • Office Shirt • Sport Jacket • Barrister’s Shirt • Lawyer’s and Syariah Gowns

PAKAIAN SIAP PAKAIAN • Barrister’s Gowns & Accessories • Exclusive Baju Kurung • Exclusive Baju Batik • Baju Melayu

HQ: No. 1.11 & 1.12, 1st Floor, Semua House, Lorong Bunus Enam, Off Jln Masjid India, 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: 03-2691 7382, 2692 6319 Fax: 03-2692 6073 Business Hours: Mon-Sat & PH: 10.30am to 8.00pm Sun: 10.30am to 7.00pm Branch: No.1.15, 1st Floor, Semua House, Lorong Bunus Enam, Off Jln Masjid India, 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Lot 1-38, Wangsa Walk Mall, Jalan Wangsa Perdana 1, Wangsa Maju, 53300 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: 03-4142 5743 Business Hours: 10.30am - 10.00pm Book Review

Creating Value From Technology Innovation Leveraging Innovation Law to Secure Returns on Innovation Investment Author: Zaid Hamzah Review by R Lakshmi

and sample agreements. Focusing more on asking the “right” questions and framing and spotting the “right” issues to be considered, this guidebook targets both enterprises and policy makers involved in innovation and R&D activities.

This book equips the readers with practical tools to do strategic analysis and manage programs that would help enhance performance at both the firm and industry levels in the innovation value chain. Taking a multidisciplinary approach covering business, economics, law and strategy in the technology innovation eco- system, this practical book covers strategy design and planning process from the conception of ideas to commercial rollout in the In our innovation-driven knowledge-based economy, lawyers marketplace. play a key role in advising their clients on the role of intellectual property laws in technology innovation. Lawyers also advise on the The book covers the following key issues in the entire innovation legal aspects of R&D management, the financing of technology value chain: development as well as on the legal aspects of financing start-up • Innovation management ventures and enterprises attempting to create innovative products • Innovation law which includes intellectual property laws, and services in the marketplace. laws relating to R&D management and the legal aspects of funding technology development This new book entitled “Creating Value from Technology • Strategic intellectual property management (especially Innovation: Leveraging Innovation Law to Secure Returns technology protection through intellectual property rights) on Innovation Investment” written by technology and • Technology commercialization intellectual property lawyer Zaid Hamzah, provides the tools to strengthen innovation management capabilities with a focus on This analytical guide book will be of value to lawyers advising R&D creating value from technology innovation. organizations, enterprises involved in innovative activities, legal and research professionals and policy makers who create national In order for lawyers to manage intellectual property and innovation frameworks and who have to ensure that the funding innovation risks and help their clients create value from of R&D activities generate economic returns for the nation. technology innovation, they must understand the innovation eco- system and the end to end process from ideas to the marketplace. The author, Zaid Hamzah is one of Asia’s leading science, This book will be a useful guide for lawyers and their clients to technology and innovation lawyers. Serving primarily as in-house better manage the process of value creation from technology counsel, Zaid has served as Director of Intellectual Property at innovation. Microsoft and was a Consultant to the Malaysian Government on the design and development of Malaysia’s National Intellectual The book provides an easy to use reference to guide the thinking Property Policy. Zaid has over 25 years of professional experience and planning of innovation strategies and programs through spanning R&D management, technology commercialization and checklists, analytical frameworks, planning templates, flow charts strategic intellectual property management.

Editorial Correction: We apologise for the inadvertent error in the name of the author of ASEAN Competition Law on page 75 of the July–Sept 2011 Praxis. The book was authored by ‘Robert Ian McEwin’ and ‘Kala Anandarajah’, and not ‘Cleveland, Grover E’. We regret of any inconvenience caused.

66 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011

By the Way ...

Sudoku Sudoku is a game of logic and deduction, with the objective of filling all the blank squares with the correct numbers in the 9x9 game square, subject to the following rules:

• Every row and every column of nine numbers must include all digits, 1 through 9, in any order; and

• Every 3x3 subsection of the 9x9 square must include all digits, 1 through 9. Answers 68 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 By the Way ...

Long call speech For admission of calvin chua delivered on 12 Aug 2011 by Ian Ghee

I am humbly requesting to conduct in English. Hardworking and integrity are we to cultivate A language legacy left by the British Greed and vile we must not dominate. With added humour and poetic richness. The Petitioner has expressed his heartfelt gratitude to these qualities. The weekend is around to leave this atmosphere madness. Bestowed unto him from his lovely parents who gave him in many quantities.

I am honoured of introducing the Petitioner Life of a lawyer is never ending. A young dashing man of such a commoner. Reading and learning we must enduring Calvin Chua Esq was born in 1987. Integrity and honesty a sense of belonging Much elated to his parents a son was given. These are guidance by the Petitioners’ Master His gentlemanly manner and finer points of practice are none to others His father is working in the sales line. But I must state it is our profession His beloved mother helps a Chinese Physician in mind. That made me enthusiast with passion

He is the eldest son of a family of two. Nine months passed so swiftly A younger sister that has brought colours to his life too. So much to learn you must steadfastly Embark on a journey of a lifetime The Petitioner would like to extend his gratefulness. Intrepidness and valour are always in the pipeline To his parents who never doubt and have great faith in his mindness. So put your head high up with pride and boldness Not forgetting his aunt who has far more understanding. To family and friends with gratefulness Patiently supporting him like her own son sort of a cling. I asked again whether its worth to attend on a Friday morning With affirmative yes I nodded without any glooming The Petitioner is also grateful to his dearest grandmother. Who has brought him up full of ensuring tender. I am sure Yang Arif will agree with me As I can see all the Petitioners smiling with a glee A surest proud moment to his late grandfather. It’s the legal profession that we are proud to uphold His absence is felt for much better. I am humbly bow before Yang Arif and my learned brothers and sisters in The Petitioner started his primary education at St. Andrew Primary School. this court before they turned cold Following with his secondary at High School, Muar to equip his learning tools. I do believe that the Petitioner is a fit and proper person Multimedia University was the Petitioner’s choice of tertiary education. There is so much to learn The Petitioner commenced of this honourable legal profession. All papers are in order and there are no objections from my learned friends The Petitioner completed his 9 months of learning with Messrs Kwong & of a cursor Allan. I humbly pray that the Petitioner be admitted and enrolled as an Advocate Under Kwong Tiong Hock Esq a fine gentleman that I have known. and Solicitor.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 69 Bar Updates/Notices

SUMMARY OF CIRCULARS (Oct–Dec 2011)

Circular No 141/2011: Amendments to the Circular No 147/2011: Anti-Money Laundering Circular No 168/2011: Relocation of the PII and Subordinate Courts Rules, Rules of the High and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 | RM Department Court, Rules of the Court of Appeal and Rules Checklist for Legal Firms and Compliance of the Federal Court Report The Professional Indemnity Insurance and Risk Management Department of Bar Council has Please be informed that the amendments to the Bank Negara Malaysia (“BNM”), the competent relocated from the Bar Council Secretariat to the Subordinate Courts Rules, Rules of the High Court, authority under the Anti-Money Laundering and following address: Rules of the Court of Appeal and Rules of the Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (“AMLATFA”), Federal Court were gazetted on 29 June 2011. conducted on-site examinations on selected legal Suite 4.03A, Wisma Maran, 28 Medan Pasar, The amendments include inclusion of provision on firms from 16 Aug to 2 Sept 2010, and found law 50050 Kuala Lumpur electronic filing, revision of interest rate from eight firms’ compliance with AMLATFA and the guidelines per centum to four per centum, and provision on issued thereunder to be weak. To improve the Telephone: 03-2032 4511 witness statements. level of compliance, Bar Council has formulated Fax: 03-2031 1641 a checklist to assist Members in working their Email: [email protected] Circular No 143/2011Track Your Firm’s Sijil way through the “Know Your Client” guidelines Annual/Practising Certificate Online issued by BNM pursuant to AMLATFA. Further, in Circular No 188/2011: Filing of Petition for order to monitor the level of compliance, BNM has Admission as an Advocate and Solicitor of the As part of our initiative to continuously improve sought Bar Council’s assistance to urge law firms High Court of Malaya and upgrade our services to Members of the Bar, to complete and submit an AMLATFA Compliance we are pleased to inform you that Bar Council Report on BNM’s website on a yearly basis. Bar Council has received a directive from the will introduce the “Track Your Firm’s Sijil Annual/ Managing Deputy Registrar of the Appellate and Practising Certificate Online” feature on the Circular No 156/2011: E-Filing Involving Letter Special Powers Division of the Kuala Lumpur High Malaysian Bar website, beginning 1 Sept 2011. This of Administration and Probate at the Kuala Court. With effect from 29 June 2011, every feature will enable the authorised representative Lumpur High Court petitioner filing Borang 1 of Petition for Admission from your firm to find out whether the Sijil as an Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Annual/Practising Certificate 2012 of his/her firm’s The e-filing system will be extended to code 31 Malaya is required to produce a printout of his or practitioner is ready for collection. Do not hesitate and code 32 (Letter of Administration and Probate) her Master’s name. The printout is available for to contact Hemalatha Subramaniam (03-2050 cases at the Kuala Lumpur High Court (Civil Division) download from http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/ 2167) or Sree Gayithri Maruthuvellu (03-2050 beginning 1 Aug 2011. Access this circular to view find_a_lawyer.html. 2164), or send an email to tracksa@malaysianbar. the new workflow on the e-filing of petitions that org.my, should you need any clarification. will come into force on the abovementioned date. Circular No 192/2011: New Ruling Made Under Section 57(a) of the Legal Profession Act Circular No 144/2011: Implementation of Circular No 162/2011: Update on the E-Filing 1976 | Responses from Bar Council/State Bar E-Filing System in the Federal Court and Court System at the Shah Alam High Court Committees Not to be Produced in Any Court of Appeal or Tribunal Please be informed that the e-filing system will be The e-filing system has been implemented in the implemented for cases of the following codes at Access this circular to view the new ruling made Federal Court and the Court of Appeal beginning the Shah Alam High Court beginning 1 Aug 2011 under section 57(a) of the Legal Profession Act 16 June 2011. Access this circular for: (Monday): 25 – JUDICIAL REVIEW; 1976 on responses from Bar Council/State Bar 27 – ADMIRALTY; 28 – WINDING UP; 29 – Committees not to be produced in any court or (1) a set of guidelines on the e-filing system at the BANKRUPTCY; and 33 – DIVORCE. tribunal. Federal Court and Court of Appeal; and Circular No 164/2011: Registrar of the High Circular No 193/2011: Amendment to Bar (2) the list of contact persons and their particulars Court of Malaya’s Practice Direction No 1 of Council Ruling 9.01(3) | Letter of Demand and in the event you require any assistance with regard 2011 | Foreclosure Proceedings and Public Costs to the system. Auction of Immovable Properties at the High Court of Malaya Access this circular to view the amendment to Circular No 149/2011: New Telephone System Bar Council Ruling 9.01(3): Letter of Demand and and Change of Telephone Number Access this circular to view the Registrar of the High Costs, which took effect immediately. Court of Malaya’s Practice Direction No 1 of 2011 Please note that the new general number for the on Foreclosure Proceedings and Public Auction of Circular No 195/2011: Accountant’s Report Bar Council Secretariat is 603-2050 2050. The old Immovable Properties at the High Court of Malaya. 2010 hunting line (603-2031 3003) was phased out on 13 July 2011. The fax numbers remain unchanged. Circular No 179/2011: Professional Indemnity Pursuant to section 79 of the Legal Profession Insurance Base Premium for 2012 is RM1,200 Act 1976, the Accountant’s Report is required to Circular No 151/2011: Payment of Fees for be submitted by sole proprietors or partners in Filing of Written Submissions and Bundle of Achieving a sustainable, stable and equitable respect of the client accounts maintained during Authorities at Court Professional Indemnity Insurance (“PII”) Scheme an accounting period for the issuance of Sijil has been a long-term objective of Bar Council. Annual, unless exempted pursuant to rule 6 of the The Chief Registrar of the Federal Court has Accordingly, we are pleased to announce that the Accountant’s Report Rules 1990. We seek your instructed, via a letter dated 13 July 2011, that 2012 PII premium has been successfully maintained kind cooperation to ensure that the Accountant’s the practice of requesting payment for the filing of at RM1,200 per lawyer, the same rate as the 2011 Report 2010 is in order when you submit your Sijil written submissions and bundle of authorities by premium. Access this circular to find out more Annual and Practising Certificate 2012 application certain courts should no longer take place. about the Professional Indemnity Insurance and to expedite the issuance of your Sijil Annual 2012. view the Quick Guide to the 2012 Online Proposal Form.

70 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Bar Updates/Notices

Circular No 197/2011: Direction on Hearing Circular No 232/2011: Court Vacation of the Circular No 233/2011: Additional Categories of Cases at Cameron Highlands Magistrate’s High Court of Malaya for 2011 of Approved Information under the Legal Court and Teluk Intan Sessions Court Profession (Publicity) Rules 2001 The Right Honourable Chief Judge of Malaya, Access this circular to view the Chief Registrar of Yang Amat Arif Tan Sri Dato’ Zulkefli b Ahmad Access this circular to view the additional categories the Federal Court’s direction on hearing of cases at Makinudin, has informed us that the court vacation of approved information under the Legal Profession Cameron Highlands Magistrate’s Court and Teluk for the High Court of Malaya for 2011 is fixed from (Publicity) Rules 2001 Intan Sessions Court. Thursday, 15 Dec 2011 to Friday, 30 Dec 2011. Circular No 168/2011: Relocation of the PII and RM Department Circular No 199/2011: Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 | The list herein highlights some of Bar Council’s circulars sent out to Members of the Bar between Compliance Report on BNM’s Website The Professional Indemnity Insurance and Risk Oct and Dec 2011 via email. Access the Malaysian Bar website at www.malaysianbar.org.my to Management Department of Bar Council has view these, and many other circulars in full. Please note that some circulars are only accessible if relocated from the Bar Council Secretariat to the Bank Negara Malaysia (“BNM”), the competent you are a registered user of the Malaysian Bar website. following address: authority under the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (“AMLATFA”), Suite 4.03A, Wisma Maran, 28 Medan Pasar, has sought Bar Council’s assistance to urge legal 50050 Kuala Lumpur firms to complete and submit an AMLATFA Compliance Report on BNM’s website on a biennial Telephone: 03-2032 4511 basis. Firms are strongly urged to complete the Fax: 03-2031 1641 Compliance Report online to ensure compliance Email: [email protected] with AMLATFA. Failure to comply could lead to BNM imposing more intrusive directives on all law firms, including legal penalties for non-compliance. Circular No 188/2011: Filing of Petition for Admission as an Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya Circular No 206/2011: “Track Your Firm’s Sijil Annual /Practising Certificate Online” Feature 0DWWHUVRIWKH Bar Council has received a directive from the Available from 15 Sept 2011 Managing Deputy Registrar of the Appellate and +HDUW Special Powers Division of the Kuala Lumpur High We refer to Circular No 143/2011 dated 5 July Court. With effect from 29 June 2011, every 2011. We are happy to inform Members that the petitioner filing Borang 1 of Petition for Admission “Track Your Firm’s Sijil Annual/Practising Certificate Each year 17.1 million people die of cardiovascular disease, 80% in the developing world. A healthy heart as an Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Online” feature was uploaded on the Malaysian is vital for healthy living, regardless of one’s age or gender. One can prevent major cardiovascular risks, Malaya is required to produce a printout of his or Bar website on 15 Sept 2011. Please take note like heart attacks and strokes by choosing a healthy diet, being physically active and not smoking. her Master’s name. The printout is available for that only one user ID and password will be provided for each firm. All offices of a firm are advised to Bar Council Malaysia and Institut Jantung Negara are jointly organising a highly informative talk on cardi- download from http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/ ovascular complications. This FREE health screening and talk aims to create awareness of heart diseases find_a_lawyer.html. liaise with the firm’s authorised representative to check the status of their practitioners’ SA/ by promoting the benefits of early prevention and a balanced lifestyle. PC 2012. Do not hesitate to contact Hemalatha Circular No 192/2011: New Ruling Made Under Subramaniam (03-2050 2167) or Sree Gayithri Section 57(a) of the Legal Profession Act Exclusive corporates rates will be offered to the Members of the Malaysian Bar for the Maruthuvellu (03-2050 2164), or send an email 1976 | Responses from Bar Council/State Bar to [email protected], should you need Executive Screening Programme by Institut Jantung Negara. Committees Not to be Produced in Any Court any clarification. or Tribunal

Access this circular to view the new ruling made Circular No 207/2011: Registrar of the High under section 57(a) of the Legal Profession Act Court of Malaya’s Circular No 2 of 2011 | Teste Date 21 Nov 2011 1976 on responses from Bar Council/State Bar for Writ of Summons (Amendment) Committees not to be produced in any court or Venue Raja Aziz Addruse Auditorium, Access this circular to view the Registrar of the High tribunal. Bar Council, No 15, Leboh Pasar Besar, Court of Malaya’ copy of Circular No 2 of 2011 regarding the teste for writ of summons filed in the 50050 Kuala Lumpur. Circular No 193/2011: Amendment to Bar High Court of Malaya. Council Ruling 9.01(3) | Letter of Demand and Time 4:00 to 7:00pm Costs Circular No 216/2011: Fees for Documents PROGRAMME Access this circular to view the amendment to Filed at Court Pursuant to Rule 91 Para 1 of Bar Council Ruling 9.01(3): Letter of Demand and Rules of the High Court 1980 (Appendix B) and 4:00 pm FREE Health Screening Costs, which took effect immediately. Rule 48 Para 63 of Subordinate Courts Rules 1980 (Schedule B) 5:00 pm Matters of theHeart Talk Circular No 195/2011: Accountant’s Report Access this circular to find out more about Fees for 6:00 pm CPR Talk and Demonstration 2010 Documents Filed at Court Pursuant to Rule 91 Para 1 of Rules of the High Court 1980 (Appendix B) Pursuant to section 79 of the Legal Profession and Rule 48 Para 63 of Subordinate Courts Rules Act 1976, the Accountant’s Report is required to 1980 (Schedule B). be submitted by sole proprietors or partners in respect of the client accounts maintained during an accounting period for the issuance of Sijil Circular No 226/2011: Relocation of Annual, unless exempted pursuant to rule 6 of the Georgetown Sessions Court/Magistrates’ Court (Criminal) to Bangunan Annex at Pulau Accountant’s Report Rules 1990. We seek your For more information or to register for the free health screening and talk, please contact Nishta Jiwa kind cooperation to ensure that the Accountant’s Pinang High Court Report 2010 is in order when you submit your Sijil by telephone at 03-2050 2037/012-2050 353, or by e-mail at [email protected] Annual and Practising Certificate 2012 application The Georgetown Sessions Court/Magistrates’ Court to expedite the issuance of your Sijil Annual 2012. (Criminal) has relocated to Bangunan Annex at the Pulau Pinang High Court. The relocated courts have commenced operation at their new location from 3 Oct 2011.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 71 G-05, Ground Floor, Straits Trading Building No 2 Jalan Lebuh Pasar Besar 50050 Kuala Lumpur Tel: 03-2694 0592

Establised for 20 years, Vincee’s provides tailored and ready-made apparel for the legal profession. Judges’ Robes and Jabots • Barristers’ Robes and Bibs • Barristers’ Coats and Shirts www.vinceestailor.com.my Bar Updates/Notices

New Admissions to the Malaysian Bar (As at time of publication)

Note: This list includes Members admitted prior to June 2011, but were only subsequently issued with their Sijil Annual/Practising Certificates during the period of June–August 2011.

SIJIL NAME DATE CALLED L/1972 Leong Zhi Hong 6 May 2011 ANNUAL TO THE BAR M/2022 Muhammad Hisyam b Abdullah 6 May 2011 NO N/2083 Norsyazreen bt Mohamed Salleh 6 May 2011 A/1829 Alex Wong 21 Jan 2011 P/462 Poo Long Jye 6 May 2011 B/261 Bin’t Huda bt Mohd Ghazali 21 Jan 2011 P/464 Puteri Nor Nadia bt Mohamed Iqbal 6 May 2011 C/1445 Chan Pooi Fuan 21 Jan 2011 S/2388 Saliza bt Mohd Sazali 6 May 2011 C/1453 Chong Bi Jun 21 Jan 2011 S/2389 Siti Nurhanizan bt Aani 6 May 2011 D/279 Dewi Ratna bt Bakrun 21 Jan 2011 T/1414 Tan Chiu Jing 6 May 2011 S/2399 Siti Nadiah bt Fakhruddin 21 Jan 2011 T/1407 Thong Chee Seng 6 May 2011 I/257 Ilham bt Umar Thabii 28 Jan 2011 W/694 Wan Mohamad Ashraf b Wan Abu Bakar 6 May 2011 N/2028 Nooraishah bt Azis 28 Jan 2011 C/1449 Choo Hong Seng 10 May 2011 G/461 Gokila Wani a/p Muthu Krishnan 11 Feb 2011 C/1451 Chu Chai Tong 10 May 2011 S/2409 Shaidatul Akmar bt Mohamad 11 Feb 2011 C/1443 Chua Kuan Ching 10 May 2011 N/2097 Nurul Fathiyah bt Abdul Rahman 24 Feb 2011 D/278 Divakaran Vasudevan 10 May 2011 M/2033 Mah Soon Sin 11 Mar 2011 K/1034 Kartina bt Abdul Rahman 10 May 2011 N/2073 Nabila Nur bt Jaffar 11 Mar 2011 L/1967 Low Pui Voon 10 May 2011 K/1035 Khatijah bt Mohd Saari 18 Mar 2011 M/2035 Mohd Khairi b Ahmad Tarmizi 10 May 2011 M/2040 Mohd Shazuan b Md Sidek 18 Mar 2011 N/2078 Nabil Aswad b Mohd Hatta 10 May 2011 R/1023 Rabaeyatul Adawiyah bt Abu Kassim 24 Mar 2011 N/2076 Nadia bt Ahmad Anis 10 May 2011 J/547 Jamaliyah bt Mohamed Kamil 4 Apr 2011 N/2081 Ng Siew Moi 10 May 2011 L/1962 Lithya Devi a/p Govindaraj 4 Apr 2011 N/2085 Nur Farzana bt Mohammad Puat 10 May 2011 N/2121 Nor Asma bt Abu Bakar 4 Apr 2011 N/2082 Nur Fathiah bt Marzuki 10 May 2011 S/2386 Syazana bt Mat Kasa 4 Apr 2011 S/2401 Shahida bt Ab Samad 10 May 2011 W/696 Wan Zafran b Pawancheek 4 Apr 2011 S/2428 Siti Farah bt Ibrahim 10 May 2011 I/250 Ida Mustaqimmah bt Ali 8 Apr 2011 T/1406 Tan Siok Khoon 10 May 2011 M/2023 Maryam bt Hasan 8 Apr 2011 T/1410 Tunku Intan Mahiya bt T Mahamad 10 May 2011 S/2383 Shariffah Raguan bt Syed Jaffar 12 Apr 2011 H/845 Halimayazahara bt Khalid 12 May 2011 C/1436 Chong Bei Lin 15 Apr 2011 S/2394 Siti Khairunisa Solehah bt Ahmad Khairuddin 12 May 2011 F/500 Foong Ling Siew 15 Apr 2011 C/1442 Chai Mei Ching 13 May 2011 M/2036 Muzanee Shah b Azlan Shah 15 Apr 2011 E/222 Eng Sok Yin 13 May 2011 N/2067 Noor Azelina bt Kassim 15 Apr 2011 G/459 Gan Su Mui 13 May 2011 N/2074 Nurul Aini bt Yezid 15 Apr 2011 K/1033 Kabina a/p Levan 13 May 2011 N/2099 Nuur Fatimahtul Zuhra bt Khairuddin 15 Apr 2011 L/1983 Laun Shin Yee 13 May 2011 R/1025 Rohaiza bt Abdul Rois 15 Apr 2011 N/2090 Nur Hafizah bt Awang 13 May 2011 T/1404 Tong Yat Ching 15 Apr 2011 T/1405 Tay Soon Chuan 13 May 2011 S/2397 Siti Rafidah bt Abdul Raof 21 Apr 2011 T/1408 Tong Teng Teng 13 May 2011 I/249 Ibrahim b Haji Ismail 22 Apr 2011 Y/619 Yap Lee Ling 13 May 2011 L/1977 Lim Ying Chang 22 Apr 2011 C/1440 Chong Shi Bin 19 May 2011 N/2119 Ng Ching Woei 22 Apr 2011 N/2079 Nur Faizira bt Abdul Rahman 19 May 2011 T/1409 Tan Chai Looi 22 Apr 2011 A/1830 Abd Rahim b Ali 20 May 2011 M/2020 Mohd Fauzi b Ismail 28 Apr 2011 A/1823 Ainur Mardhiah bt Ramli 20 May 2011 S/2406 Shailendrakumar a/l Naraynan 28 Apr 2011 A/1818 Ariani Irda bt Bakri 20 May 2011 Y/622 Yusma Norazreeny bt Mohd Yusof 28 Apr 2011 I/252 Indra a/p Rathakrisnan 20 May 2011 N/2096 Najlia bt Mohd Nadir 29 Apr 2011 I/254 Izyan bt Ithnain @ Senin 20 May 2011 S/2410 Siveram a/l Marthammuthu 29 Apr 2011 L/1968 Lee Eng Yeow 20 May 2011 A/1837 Aisyah bt Mohd Soberi 6 May 2011 L/1966 Lew Geok Chin 20 May 2011 A/1824 Azlina bt Habib Rahman 6 May 2011 L/1969 Lim Hui Yin 20 May 2011 A/1820 Azri-Malek b Wan Haron 6 May 2011 N/2080 Nor Hayati bt Osman 20 May 2011 H/846 Hamimi Masrina bt Ab Hamid 6 May 2011 N/2077 Nur Azhar b Bujang 20 May 2011

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 73 Bar Updates/Notices

N/2091 Nurzalifah bt Sulaiman 20 May 2011 S/2393 Suriakala a/p Sivalingam 13 June 2011 S/2385 Siti Baiduri bt Khalil 20 May 2011 V/260 Vendee Chai 13 June 2011 S/2404 Siti Farihah bt Mohamad Mayidin 20 May 2011 W/695 Wan Latifah bt Mukhtar 13 June 2011 S/2387 Siti Nor Syahidah bt Ismail 20 May 2011 Y/620 Yeo Shu Pin 13 June 2011 Z/409 Zafirah bt Zabidin 20 May 2011 G/464 Ganesh a/l Magenthiran 15 June 2011 Z/408 Zairul Izzain b Ibrahim 20 May 2011 A/1828 Ahmad Saidi b Mohamad Daud 16 June 2011 A/1822 Afida Nurizzatie bt Abdul Lateh 25 May 2011 A/1826 Adi Zukarnain b Zulkafli 17 June 2011 S/2408 Seak Chia Yan 25 May 2011 A/1825 Ahmad Zulfadli b Ibrahim 17 June 2011 S/2405 Siti Aimuni bt Abd Latif 25 May 2011 C/1448 Cahaya Narimas bt Faad 17 June 2011 N/2093 Nor Afifah bt Rahimi 26 May 2011 D/280 Dg Nuratiqah Diyanah bt Ag Saifuddin 17 June 2011 N/2118 Nur Hidayah bt Mohd Razali 26 May 2011 H/847 Heng Jia Lian 17 June 2011 N/2112 Nur Shaniza bt Shuhaimin 26 May 2011 K/1040 Kalyani a/p Vengada Chalam 17 June 2011 S/2423 Siti Fadila bt Che Man 26 May 2011 K/1036 Khairul Anuar b Musa 17 June 2011 S/2422 Siti Farah bt Yusoff 26 May 2011 K/1038 Kwan Li Geng 17 June 2011 N/2071 Nur Syazwani bt Shabudin 27 May 2011 L/1979 Lee Cincee 17 June 2011 W/693 Wan Mohammad Fairuz Haneff b Wan Azhan 27 May 2011 L/1971 Lim Rue Chee 17 June 2011 A/1819 Abi Mursyidin b Awal 1 June 2011 M/2034 Mawar bt Ahmad Fadzil 17 June 2011 F/501 Farah Idayu bt Nusi 1 June 2011 M/2031 Mohamad ’ Ammar Redzuan 17 June 2011 L/1984 Lingeswaran a/l Andiappan 1 June 2011 M/2025 Mohammad Hanif b Abdul Rahman 17 June 2011 M/2028 Mohd Firdaush b Jaafar 1 June 2011 N/2111 Ng Nen Sin 17 June 2011 N/2087 Nadiah Hanim bt Yaakob 1 June 2011 N/2125 Noor Raihan bt A Malek 17 June 2011 N/2098 Noraini bt Nordin 1 June 2011 N/2114 Noor Yasmin bt Samsudin 17 June 2011 N/2086 Norazreen bt Ab Rahman 1 June 2011 N/2094 Nor Hanida bt Abd Halim 17 June 2011 N/2088 Nur Fazreen bt Khalid 1 June 2011 N/2103 Norzurina bt Zolkefli 17 June 2011 N/2110 Nur Hafidah bt Abd Kadir 1 June 2011 N/2106 Nur Husna bt Zakaria @ Kira 17 June 2011 N/2084 Nur Izzaida bt Zamani 1 June 2011 N/2108 Nurul Adlin bt Nazri 17 June 2011 P/463 Pua Shea Erl 1 June 2011 R/1026 Rajvin Charan Suri 17 June 2011 S/2395 Seow Jing Hui 1 June 2011 R/1028 Rozarina bt Rosli 17 June 2011 S/2398 Siti Fairuz bt Kamis 1 June 2011 S/2421 Shobna a/p Sivaraman 17 June 2011 S/2412 Siti Hajar bt Mohamad @ Abd Ghani 1 June 2011 S/2402 Siti Suraya bt Abd Razak 17 June 2011 L/1975 Lily Harfiza bt Harun 2 June 2011 G/460 Gene Anand Vendargon 20 June 2011 N/2102 Nadia bt Hasim 2 June 2011 A/1832 Adrian Tay Kien Chong 24 June 2011 S/2413 Siti Hajar Aisyah bt Mohd Pozi 2 June 2011 A/1838 Ahmad Deniel b Roslan 24 June 2011 V/261 Vidumalar a/p Subbaramaniam 2 June 2011 C/1454 Carolyn Chien Siew Li 24 June 2011 I/255 Ili Sarra bte Abdul Rahman 3 June 2011 E/224 Emile Ezra b Md Hussain 24 June 2011 N/2089 Nur Afiqah bt Zakaria 3 June 2011 F/503 Foong Chee Chong 24 June 2011 A/1821 Amirus Anis bt Dzohry 13 June 2011 L/1974 Lee Chiw Poh 24 June 2011 A/1827 Azira bt Aziz 13 June 2011 L/1986 Lily Suriani bt Hanapi 24 June 2011 C/1446 Cheong Siow Wei 13 June 2011 L/1980 Lim Minyi 24 June 2011 C/1447 Chia Peak Hwa 13 June 2011 M/2029 Muhammad Aiman b Mohamad Salmi 24 June 2011 C/1444 Collin Arvind Andrew 13 June 2011 N/2095 Nazifah bt Mohd Basiron 24 June 2011 E/225 Elyazura bt Md Shaarani @ Md Nawi 13 June 2011 N/2104 Noordiyana bt Md Shukor 24 June 2011 E/223 Eolanda Yeo Jin Huay 13 June 2011 N/2105 Nur Asna bt Abd Halim 24 June 2011 F/502 Farhana bt Mat Haril 13 June 2011 N/2115 Nur Syuhada bt Shafiee 24 June 2011 F/504 Fariz Ariffin b Mohd Noor 13 June 2011 N/2100 Nur Yasmin bt Osman 24 June 2011 K/1037 Koh Shing Ru 13 June 2011 R/1027 Rahmah bt Rahmat 24 June 2011 L/1973 Lai Yee Lee 13 June 2011 S/2400 Sharifah Natasha 24 June 2011 L/1976 Lailil Nazira bt Basari 13 June 2011 S/2429 Siti Noor Ellyana bt Johari 24 June 2011 L/1970 Lee Teck Bee 13 June 2011 T/1416 Toh Hui Ling 24 June 2011 M/2030 Mohamed Faiq Azim b Mohamed Asri 13 June 2011 V/262 Vooi Weng Cheong 24 June 2011 M/2043 Mohd Farid Nazmi b Safinei 13 June 2011 I/258 Ida Shazreen bt Omar 27 June 2011 M/2032 Mohd Iqbal b Zainal Abidin 13 June 2011 N/2092 Neo Han Ying 27 June 2011 N/2101 Norayumasrina bt Husain 13 June 2011 Y/623 Yokeswary a/p Balasubramaniam 27 June 2011 S/2392 Sathiesh a/l K Purushothaman 13 June 2011 S/2417 Sitti Zainah bt Zainal 30 June 2011 S/2390 Selwester Michael a/l Das 13 June 2011 S/2430 Sofiah bt Omar 30 June 2011 S/2396 Shazwani bt Jalil 13 June 2011 N/2116 Norul Izwanie bt Mohd Zalil 30 June 2011 S/2403 Siti Nurida bt Sehoo 13 June 2011 K/1039 Koek Wen Jing 1 July 2011

74 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Bar Updates/Notices

O/356 Ooi Chee Kin 1 July 2011 T/1412 Tan Zher Rhu 11 July 2011 S/2416 Satwant Singh Randhawa 1 July 2011 T/1413 Teo Ju-Li 11 July 2011 S/2419 Shasha a/p Kummar 1 July 2011 Y/624 Yong Yishan Christina 11 July 2011 S/2407 Shyahera bt Mahaboob Ali 1 July 2011 A/1835 Andrew Yeoh Teck Keong 15 July 2011 N/2109 Niak Hiong Keong 7 July 2011 D/281 Darmendirakumar a/l Thangavelu Anandan 15 July 2011 A/1831 Aidil Ratna Edorra bt Suhaimin 8 July 2011 G/463 Glen Kenny 15 July 2011 A/1834 Auzan Hasanuddin b Sazali 8 July 2011 L/1981 Lee Ai Hsian 15 July 2011 O/357 Ooi Lo Yinn 8 July 2011 M/2037 Mohd Farhan Afiq b Harun 15 July 2011 R/1029 Ravikumar a/l Arumugam 8 July 2011 M/2042 Mohd Khairul Zaman b Ahmad Tajuddin 15 July 2011 S/2420 Seah Song Yan 8 July 2011 N/2113 Noor Azween bt Mohammed Iqbal 15 July 2011 S/2425 Siti Fairuz bt Mohd Ali 8 July 2011 N/2122 Nurul Huda bt Padulli 15 July 2011 S/2414 Siti Khadijah bt Zainal Rashid 8 July 2011 S/2411 Siti Maznah Mariam bt Mokhtar 15 July 2011 S/2418 Sivaraj a/l Narayanan 8 July 2011 S/2431 Spring Lim Shu Zhen 15 July 2011 T/1411 Teoh Le Ling 8 July 2011 S/2427 Sri Nagavarnan a/l Subramaniam 15 July 2011 M/2041 Mohd Shafieuddin b Ibrahim 8 July 2011 S/2424 Syazwani bt Mohd Zawawi 15 July 2011 M/2045 Muhammad Ali Redha b Ahmad Rashidi 8 July 2011 W/697 Wong Lien Lien 15 July 2011 A/1833 Ahmad Hanafi b Lop Ahmad 11 July 2011 R/1030 Ravenesan a/l Sivanesan 22 July 2011 C/1450 Chow Yu Jiin 11 July 2011 C/1452 Chor Jack 1 Aug 2011 F/505 Fazleela Elia bt Jaafar 11 July 2011 G/462 Gary Lee Tuck Wee 1 Aug 2011 J/548 Jamilah bt Samsudin 11 July 2011 Y/625 Yew Yuen Wah 1 Aug 2011 K/1041 Kung Que Seng 11 July 2011 D/283 David Ng Yew Kiat 5 Aug 2011 L/1982 Lee Hsiao Ching 11 July 2011 J/549 Joanne Lim Khai Weih 5 Aug 2011 M/2038 Mun Jing Kit 11 July 2011 L/1987 Low Wan Rou 5 Aug 2011 N/2124 Nah Swee Wayne 11 July 2011 L/1985 Loshini a/p Ramarmuty 12 Aug 2011 N/2120 Noor Amalina bt Shaharuddin 11 July 2011 M/2044 Mohd Khainis b Yussof 12 Aug 2011 N/2117 Noor Mazrinie bt Mahmood 11 July 2011 O/358 Ooi Keng Liang 26 Aug 2011 LIBRARY UPDATES NEW BOOKS Ashton, David. Ashton & Reid on clubs and associations. 2nd Royal Commission To Enquire Into The Death Of Teoh Beng ed. Bristol: Jordans, 2011. Hock. Report of the royal commission of enquiry into the death of Teoh Beng Hock: presented to Seri Paduka Chan Kok Yew, Gary. The law of torts in Singapore. Baginda Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on the 22nd June Singapore: Academy Pub., 2011. 2011 by Commissioners. Malaysia: Royal Commission To Chen Voon Shian. Industrial relations law and practice in Enquire Into The Death Of Teoh Beng Hock, 2011. Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: CCH Asia, 2011. Suruhanjaya Diraja Untuk Menyiasat Kematian Teoh Beng Hamid Ibrahim. Bribery & corruption. Petaling Jaya, Selangor: Hock. Laporan Suruhanjaya Diraja Untuk Menyiasat Gavel Publications, 2011. Kematian Teoh Beng Hock: disembahkan kepada Seri Paduka Baginda Yang Di-Pertuan Agong pada 22nd Jun Lightfoot, Chrissie. The naked lawyer: RIP to XXX, how to 2011 oleh Pesuruhjaya. Malaysia: Suruhanjaya Diraja market, brand and sell you! London: Ark Group, 2010. Untuk Menyiasat Kematian Teoh Beng Hock, 2011. Malaysia human rights report 2010: civil & political rights. Wan Izatul Asma Wan Talaat. Marine insurance law: issues Petaling Jaya, Selangor: SUARAM Kommunikasi, 2011. of proximate cause, perils of the sea, and the exclusions. Menon, Madhava [Ed.]. A handbook on clinical legal Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa Dan Pustaka, 2010. education. 1st ed. Reprint 2011. Lucknow, India: Eastern Zaid Hamzah. Creating value from technology innovation. Book Company, 2011. Petaling Jaya, Selangor: International Law Book Services, Sen, B. Six decades of law, politics & diplomacy: some [2011]. reminiscences and reflections. 2010 ed. Reprint 2011. Zaid Ibrahim & Co. Demystifying Islamic Finance: correcting New Delhi, India: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., misconceptions, advancing value propositions. Kuala 2011. Lumpur: Zaid Ibrahim & Co., [no date]. Sher L. Trade unions in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: CCH, 2011.

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 75 Bar Updates/Notices

LEGISLATION (July–September 2011)

ACT 729 NATIONAL SPORTS INSTITUTE ACT 2011 BILLS 2011 An Act to provide for the establishment of the National Sports Institute, to set PUBLICATION out the functions and powers of the Institute, and to provide for other matters TITLE DATE connected therewith or incidental thereto. w.e.f.:- 16.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 503/2011] Capital Markets and Services (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.19/2011] 30/6/2011 ACT 730 TRADE DESCRIPTIONS ACT 2011 Employment (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.15/2011] 30/6/2011 An Act for the purpose of promoting good trade practices by prohibiting false trade descriptions and false or misleading statements, conduct and practices in Domestic Violence (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.24/2011] 7/7/2011 relation to the supply of goods and services and to provide for matters connected Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.21/2011] 7/7/2011 therewith or incidental thereto. Fisheries (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.23/2011] 7/7/2011 w.e.f.:- Not yet in force Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan Malaysia (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.22/2011] 7/7/2011 ACT 731 MONEY SERVICES BUSINESS ACT 2011 An Act to provide for the licensing, regulation and supervision of money services Lembaga Pembangunan Industri Pembinaan Malaysia (Amendment) Act 16/6/2011 business and 2011 [DR.10/2011] to provide for related matters. Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2011 [DR.13/2011] 16/6/2011 Notes:- Repeals the Money-Changing Act 1998 [Act 577] w.e.f.:- Not yet in force Medical Device Act 2011 [DR.9/2011] 16/6/2011 ACT 732 NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL ACT 2011 Medical Device Authority Act 2011 [DR.12/2011] 16/6/2011 An Act to establish a National Wages Consultative Council with the responsibility Money Services Business Act 2011 [DR.20/2011] 7/7/2011 to conduct studies on all matters concerning minimum wages and to make National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011 [DR.17/2011] 30/6/2011 recommendation to the Government to make minimum wages orders according to sectors, types of employment and regional areas, and to provide for related Petroleum (Income Tax) (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.14/2011] 24/6/2011 matters. Securities Commission (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.18/2011] 30/6/2011 Notes:- Repeals the Wages Council Act 1947 [Act 195] w.e.f.:- 23.9.2011- [P.U.(B) 507/2011] Supplementary Supply (2011) Act 2011 [DR.11/2011] 16/6/2011 Trade Descriptions Act 2011 [DR.16/2011] 30/6/2011 AMENDING ACTS 2007 PRINCIPAL ACTS 2007 ACT TITLE ACT NO: TITLE NO: ACT LOCAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 ACT 672 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 A1311 Notes:- Amends ss. 72 and 73. An Act to provide for and regulate the management of controlled solid waste and - This Act applies to Peninsular Malaysia and Federal Territory of Putrajaya. public cleansing for the purpose of maintaining proper sanitation and for matters w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 488/2011]- (in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri incidental thereto. Sembilan, Malacca and Johore.) w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 490/2011] – in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 491/2011]- (in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and Sembilan, Malacca and Johore, and the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya. Federal Territory of Putrajaya.)

ACT STREET, DRAINAGE AND BUILDING (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 A1312 Notes:- Amends s.133 PRINCIPAL ACTS 2011 - This Act applies to Peninsular Malaysia and Federal Territory of Putrajaya. w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 489/2011] – (in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri ACT TITLE Sembilan, Malacca and Johore.) NO: w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 492/2011] – (in the federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya.) ACT SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (2011) ACT 2011 A1396 An Act to apply a sum from the Consolidated Fund for additional expenditure ACT TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 for the service of the year 2011 and to appropriate that sum for certain purposes A1313 Notes:- Amends s.22 for that year. - This Act applies to Peninsular Malaysia and Federal Territory of Putrajaya. w.e.f.:- 22.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 493/2011] – (in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and the ACT 724 NATIONAL VISUAL ARTS DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACT 2011 Federal Territory of Putrajaya.) An Act to establish the National Visual Arts Development Board and National Visual Arts Gallery, to provide for the acquisition, preservation, exhibition and advancement of works of visual arts in Malaysia and for matters connected therewith, to repeal the National Art Gallery Act 1959, to dissolve the Board AMENDING ACTS 2011 of Trustees of the National Art Gallery and to provide for consequential and incidental matters. ACT Notes:- Repeals the National Art Gallery Act 1959 [Act 516] TITLE - Dissolves the Board of Trustees of the National Art Gallery. NO: w.e.f.:- 27.8.2011 – [P.U.(B) 463/2011] ACT ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 ACT 726 SUSTAINABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT 2011 A1395 Notes:- Amends ss.2,8,10,11,30,38,39,42 & 51 An Act to provide for the establishment of the Sustainable Energy Development w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 – [P.U.(B) 342/2011] Authority Malaysia and to provide for its functions and powers and for related matters. ACT KOOTU FUNDS (PROHIBITION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 Notes:- This Act comes into operation throughout Malaysia except for the State of A1397 Notes:- Amends s.3 Sarawak. w.e.f.:- 16.8.2011 – [P.U.(B) 458/2011] w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 – [P.U.(B) 495/2011] - throughout Malaysia except for the State of ACT CO-OPERATIVE COLLEGE (INCORPORATION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 Sarawak. A1398 Notes:- Amends ss.2,3,4,5,10,11,12, ACT 728 MALAYSIAN QUARANTINE AND INSPECTION SERVICES ACT 2011 - Inserts new ss.4A- 4P,5A,7A,7B,8A,12A-12G An Act to provide for the Malaysian quarantine and inspection services for the - Deletes Sch. purpose of providing integrated services relating to quarantine, inspection and w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011- [P.U.(B) 494/2011] enforcement at the entry points, quarantine stations and quarantine premises and certification for import and export of plants, animals, carcasses, fish, agricultural ACT MALAYSIAN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (INCORPORATION) produce, soils and microorganisms and includes inspection of and enforcement A1399 (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 relating to food for matters connected to it. Notes:- Amends long title ss.1,2,3,3A,3D,6,6A,7A,7B,10,10A,12,13,Sch w.e.f.:- Not yet in force - Inserts new ss.7C,10AA w.e.f.:- 19.8.2011

76 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Bar Updates/Notices

ACT PROMOTION OF INVESTMENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 CIVIL AVIATION ACT 1969 [ACT 3] 239/2011 A1400 Notes:- Amends ss.5,6,9A,18,21,21A,21B,21BA,21C,21D,21DA,21E,21F,21G,21H,21I, CIVIL AVIATION (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) REGULATIONS 2011 21J, 21K, 21L, 23,24,25,26F,26I,26J, 26K,26L,27,27C,27E,27F,27G, 27I,27J,27K, 27L,2 Issued under s.3, Civil Aviation Act 1969 7M,27N,28,29C,29L,29M,29O,30A,41B.43A Notes:- Amends Sch.12, [P.U.(A) 139/1996] - Deletes ss.21M,22,26O,27O,29P w.e.f.:- 15.7.2011 - Inserts new s.22A CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 1999 [ACT 599] 313/2011 w.e.f.:- 8.9.2007 - Paragraphs 2(a),(b) and (f), paragraph 3(b), paragraphs 14(a) and CONSUMER PROTECTION (PROHIBITION AGAINST UNSAFE GOODS) ORDER 2011 (b), and sections 21,26,27,31,35,37,42,43,46,49, and 50. Issued under s.23,Consumer Protection Act 1999 w.e.f.:- 21.5.2003 - s.33 w.e.f.:- 26.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 19.8.2011 - remaining sections CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 273/2011 ACT JUDGES’ REMUNERATION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (CONTROLLED ARTICLES) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 A1401 Notes:- Amends ss.4,5,7A,9,Sch.3 and Sch.4 Issued under s.5, Control of Supplies Act 1961 w.e.f.:- 1.1.2009 – ss.2,3,5,6 and 7 Notes:- The articles specified in the Schedule are declared to be controlled articles for w.e.f.:- 28.8.2008 – s.4 the period from 16 August 2011 to 9 June 2012. w.e.f.:- 16.8.2011 ACT PETROLEUM (INCOME TAX) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 286/2011 A1402 Notes:- Amends Sch.1 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (CONTROLLED ARTICLES) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 - Inserts new Chapter 6 (ss.22A), s.65C Issued under s.5, Control of Supplies Act 1961 w.e.f.:- 30.11.2010 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011-6.9.2011 ACT SECURITIES COMMISSION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 COURTS OF JUDICATURE ACT 1964 [ACT 91] 209/2011 A1403 Notes:- Amend ss.2,15,22A,24,31A,31C,31E,31L,Division 4 of Part IIIA,31N,31O,31P,3 RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL (AMENDMENT) 2011 1Q,31R,31S,31T,31W,31X,31Y,31ZB,31ZD,126,134,146,147,150A,152A,159 and Sch.1 Issued under s.17, Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Inserts new ss.31EA,150B,159A Notes:- Amends r.2,18,78 - Deletes ss.31ZA - Inserts new r.80A w.e.f.:- Not yet in force w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011

ACT VALUERS, APPRAISERS AND ESTATE AGENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 COURTS OF JUDICATURE ACT 1964 [ACT 91] 208/2011 A1404 Notes:- Amend ss.2,4,10,12,16,17,19,21,22A,22C,23,24,25,29,30 and 31 RULES OF THE FEDERAL COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 - Inserts new ss.10A,17A and 22E Issued under s.17, Courts of Judicature Act 1964 w.e.f.:- 19.8.2011 Notes:- Amends r.111 - Inserts new r.113A ACT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES) (AMENDMENT) w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011 A1405 ACT 2011 COURTS OF JUDICATURE ACT 1964 [ACT 91] 210/2011 Notes:- Amends ss.2,3,4,11,Sch.1,2,3 and 5 RULES OF THE HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) 2011 - Inserts new ss.1A,1B,2,3,6A,6B,8A,New Sch. 7 & 8 Issued under s.17, Courts of Judicature Act 1964 w.e.f.:- 16.9.2011 Notes:- General Amendment:- substitutes for the words “8 per centum” wherever they appear the words “4 per centum”. ACT CAPITAL MARKETS AND SERVICES (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 - Amends O.35A, O.92 A1406 Notes:- Amends ss.2,10,26,28,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,78, w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011 - rule 4 (O.92) 80,92,98,99,101,104,105,107,111,121,122, Subheading of subdivision 5 of Division w.e.f.:- 29.6.2011 - remaining rules (General Amendment and O.35A) 4 of Part III, ss.125,126,137,139,140,160,164,167,169,208,232,317A,320,320A, 353,354,355,356,368,369,371 and 378. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE [ACT 593] 319/2011 - Inserts new ss.92A, new subdivision 4 of Div 3 of Part III (ss.107A-107J, new Part IIIA CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (RATES OF PAYMENT TO WITNESSES) RULES 2011 (ss.139A-139ZM), new Part IXA (ss.346A-346D), 362A,378A. Issued under s.428, Criminal Procedure Code - Deletes ss.68,100,102,103 and Sch.10 Notes:- Revokes the Criminal Procedure (Witnesses Fees) Rules 1954, [L.N. 658/1954] w.e.f.:- Not yet in force w.e.f.:- 10.9.2011

ACT LEMBAGA PEMBANGUNAN INDUSTRI PEMBINAAN MALAYSIA (AMENDMENT) CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 200/2011 A1407 ACT 2011 CUSTOMS (AMENDMENT) (NO.3) REGULATIONS 2011 Notes:- Amends ss.2,3,4,11,15,20,21,22,23,24,Part.VI,ss.25,26,27,29,30,31,Part VII Issued under s.142(4), Customs Act 1967 (ss.32-33B),34,Part IX (ss.35-35W),37,38,40,Sch.3. Notes:- Amends reg.3, [P.U.(A) 162/1977] - Inserts new ss.25A,Part.VIIA(ss.33C-33F),s.34A,Part VIIIA(ss.34B-34E), ss.38A,38B,38C, w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 39A and Sch.4 w.e.f.:- Not yet in force CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 217/2011 CUSTOMS (PROHIBITION OF EXPORTS) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.31(1), Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Amends Sch.3, [P.U.(A) 87/2008] LATEST INDEX TO P.U.(A) SERIES 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 P.U.(A) 195/2011 - P.U.(A) 328/2011] CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 218/2011 As at 26 Sept 2011 CUSTOMS (PROHIBITION OF IMPORTS) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.31(1), Customs Act 1967 Title P.U.(A) NO. Notes:- Amends Sch.4, [P.U.(A) 86/2008] w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 ANIMALS ACT 1953 [ACT 647] 212/2011 ANIMALS (IMPORT AND EXPORT EXAMINATION FEES) (AMENDMENT) RULES CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 312/2011 2011 CUSTOMS (PROHIBITION OF IMPORTS) (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.86(2)(l), Animals Act 1953 Issued under s.31(1), Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Amends Sch.1 and 2, [P.U.(A) 374/2010] Notes:- Amends Sch.2, [P.U.(A) 86/2008] w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 ATOMIC ENERGY LICENSING ACT 1984 [ACT 304] 274/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 324/2011 ATOMIC ENERGY LICENSING (RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT) CUSTOMS (VALUES OF IMPORTED COMPLETELY BUILT-UP MOTOR VEHICLES) REGULATIONS 2011 (NEW) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.68(2)(a), Atomic Energy Licensing Act 1984. Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 16.8.2011 Notes:- Amends Sch., [P.U.(A) 108/2006] w.e.f.:- 20.9.2011 BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT 1989 [ACT 372] 196/2011 BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (LICENSED FOREIGN ELECTRONIC CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 315/2011 MONEY-BROKER) (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUE OF IMPORTED COMPLETELY BUILT-UP MOTOR VEHICLES) Issued under s.118(1), Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 (USED) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 21.6.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 CARE CENTRES ACT 1993 [ACT 506] 253/2011 CARE CENTRES (COMPOUNDING OF OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 194/2011 Issued under ss.21A and 24, Care Centres Act 1993 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.12) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.8.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 16.6.2011-29.6.2011 CHILD CARE CENTRE ACT 1984 [ACT 308] 250/2011 CHILD CARE CENTRE (COMPOUNDING OF OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 213/2011 Issued under ss.21A and 23, Child Care Centre Act 1984 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.13) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.8.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 30.6.2011-13.7.2011

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 77 Bar Updates/Notices

CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 238/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 316/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.14) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.36) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 14.7.2011-27.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 5.9.2011-11.9.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 252/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 320/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.15) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.37) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 28.7.2011-10.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 12.9.2011-18.9.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 270/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 322/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.16) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.38) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 11.8.2011-24.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 19.9.2011-25.9.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 298/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 328/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.17) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.39) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011-7.9.2011 w.e.f.:- 26.9.2011-2.10.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 318/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 299/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.18) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS DUTIES (GOODS UNDER THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AMONG THE GOVERNMENT OF w.e.f.:- 8.9.2011-21.9.2011 THE MEMBER COUNTRIES OF THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 326/2011 AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.19) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.11(1), Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Amends Sch.2, [P.U.(A) 209/2007] w.e.f.:- 22.9.2011-5.10.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 216/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 215/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM KERNEL) (NO.7) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS DUTIES (GOODS UNDER THE MALAYSIA-INDIA COMPREHENSIVE Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION) (MICECA) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011-31.7.2011 Issued under s.11(1), Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 256/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM KERNEL) (NO.8) ORDER 2011 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR OFFICERS (OATHS AND FEES) ACT 1959 [ACT 348] 237/2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR OFFICERS (REMISSION OF FEES) REGULATIONS w.e.f.:- 1.8.2011-31.8.2011 2011 Issued under s.4(2), Diplomatic and Consular (Oaths and Fees) 1959 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 311/2011 Notes:- The fees for Malaysia passport payable under subparagraph A(i) of the Schedule CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM KERNEL) (NO.9) ORDER 2011 to the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees) (No.3) Order 1962 [F.L.N. 239/62] shall Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 be Remitted hundred (100) percent in respect of immigration officers appointed under w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011-30.9.2011 section 3 of the Immigration Act 1959/63 [Act 155] CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 195/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.7.2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.25) ORDER 2011 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (DISCIPLINE) ACT 1976 [ACT 174] 260/2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (DISCIPLINE) (AMENDMENT OF FIRST SCHEDULE) w.e.f.:- 20.6.2011-26.6.2011 ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 204/2011 Issued under s.22(2), Educational Institutions (Discipline) Act 1976 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.26) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, Educational Institutions (Discipline) Act 1976 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- This Order comes into operation as follows: w.e.f.:- 27.6.2011-3.7.2011 (a) Institut Pendidikan Guru Malaysia on 25 November 2010; (b) Kolej Matrikulasi Selangor on 13 July 2010; CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 225/2011 (c) Kolej Matrikulasi Teknikal Pahang on 13 July 2010; CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.27) ORDER 2011 (d) Kolej Matrikulasi Teknikal Kedah on 13 July 2010; and Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 (e) Kolej Matrikulasi Teknikal Johor on 5 January 2011. w.e.f.:- 4.7.2011-10.7.2011 EMPLOYEES’ SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 1969 [ACT 4] 214/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 232/2011 EMPLOYEES’ SOCIAL SECURITY (SUPPLY) REGULATIONS 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.28) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.72, Employees’ Social Security Act 1969 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 11.7.2011-17.7.2011 ENTERTAINMENT (FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR) ACT 1992 [ACT 493] 327/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 240/2011 ENTERTAINMENT (FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR) (DECLARATION) CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.29) ORDER 2011 ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under para.2(m), Entertainment (Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur) Act 1992 w.e.f.:- 18.7.2011-24.7.2011 Notes:- Any reading materials, photographs, cinematography films, video movies, CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 249/2011 reproduction or transmission of any music, song or speech, video games, games of skill CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.30) ORDER 2011 or chances or any reproduction, transmission or information obtained or downloaded Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 from computer at any cyber centre and cyber cafe to be entertainment. w.e.f.:- 25.7.2011-31.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.10.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 255/2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY ACT 1953 [ACT 103] 241/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.31) ORDER 2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY (EXEMPTION) (NO.9) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12(1)(b), Entertainments Duty Act 1953 w.e.f.:- 1.8.2011-7.8.2011 Notes:- Exempts the admission ticket for the Mary J Blige Live in Malaysia show which was held at the Plenary Hall, Kuala Lumpur on 9 February 2011. CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 265/2011 w.e.f.:- 20.7.2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.32) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY ACT 1953 [ACT 103] 242/2011 w.e.f.:- 8.8.2011-14.8.2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY (EXEMPTION) (NO.10) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12(1)(b), Entertainments Duty Act 1953 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 272/2011 Notes:- Exempts the admission ticket for the Jay Chou “The Era 2011” World Tour Live CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.33) ORDER 2011 In Malaysia show which was held at the Stadium Putra Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur on 4 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 to 7 March 2011. w.e.f.:- 15.8.2011-21.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 20.7.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 283/2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY ACT 1953 [ACT 103] 243/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.34) ORDER 2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY (EXEMPTION) (NO.11) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12(1)(b), Entertainments Duty Act 1953 w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011-28.8.2011 Notes:- Exempts the admission ticket for the Common Live In Malaysia 2011 show which CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 310/2011 was held at the KL Live, Kuala Lumpur on 18 March 2011. CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.35) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 20.7.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 29.8.2011-4.9.2011

78 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Bar Updates/Notices

ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY ACT 1953 [ACT 103] 244/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 231/2011 ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY (EXEMPTION) (NO.12) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (SENAI- Issued under s.12(1)(b), Entertainments Duty Act 1953 PASIR GUDANG-DESARU EXPRESSWAY) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Exempts the admission ticket for the Super Junior 3rd Asia Tour show which was Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 held at the Stadium Putra Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur on 19 March 2011. Notes:- Revokes the Federal Roads (Private Management) (Collection of Tolls) (Senai- w.e.f.:- 20.7.2011 Pasir Gudang-Desaru Expressway) Order 2009 [P.U.(A) 364/2009] FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 259/2011 w.e.f.:- 10.7.2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO ETHYLENE (M) SDN. BHD.KERTEH, FEES ACT 1951 [ACT 209] 275/2011 TERENGGANU) ORDER 2011 FEES (FEDERAL PUBLIC OFFICER’S SALARY DEDUCTION FACILITY) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 Issued under s.3, Fees Act 1951 w.e.f.:- 5.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 18.8.2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 271/2011 FEES ACT 1951 [ACT 209] 236/2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO MALAYSIA LNG SDN. BHD., FEES (PASSPORTS AND VISAS) (REMISSION OF FEES) ORDER 2011 BINTULU SARAWAK) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.10, Fees Act 1951 Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 15.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 13.8.2011 HIRE-PURCHASE ACT 1967 [ACT 212] 223/2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 284/2011 HIRE-PURCHASE (APPLICATION OF PERMIT AND PROCEDURE OF REPOSSESSION) FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO MTBE MALAYSIA SDN. (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 BHD.,KUANTAN, PAHANG) Issued under s.57(2)(b), Hire-Purchase Act 1967. ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends reg.4, [P.U.(A) 192/2011] Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 4.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (CONTROL AND LICENSING) ACT 1966 [ACT 118] 251/2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 323/2011 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (CONTROL AND LICENSING) (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO PETRONAS CARIGALI SDN. BHD., Issued under s.2(2), Housing Development (Control and Licensing Act 1966 KERTEH, TERENGGANU) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Exempts the housing developer One IFC Residances Sdn. Bhd. from the Issued under s.55(3),Factories and Machinery Act 1967 provisions of the Act for the development and sale of 48 floors of one block service w.e.f.:- 20.9.2011 apartments comprising 148 housing units, Lot 71, Section 70, (Title No.46181), Bandar FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 294/2011 Kuala Lumpur, Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO PETRONAS METHANOL LABUAN w.e.f.:- 7.7.2010 SDN. BHD. FEDERAL TERRITORY OF LABUAN) ORDER 2011 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (CONTROL AND LICENSING) ACT 1966 [ACT 118] 269/2011 Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (CONTROL AND LICENSING) (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 24.8.2011 CORRIGENDUM FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 226/2011 Notes:- Corrigendum to [P.U.(A) 251/2011] FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO POLYETHYLENE (M) SDN. BHD., - Substitutes for the words “One IFC Residances Sdn. Bhd.” appearing in the schedule KERTEH, TERENGGANU) ORDER 2011 the words “One IFC Residence Sdn Bhd.”. Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 IMMIGRATION ACT 1959/63 [ACT 155] 267/2011 w.e.f.:- 5.7.2011 IMMIGRATION (EXEMPTION) (ASYLUM SEEKERS) ORDER 2011 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 247/2011 Issued under s.55, Immigration Act 1959/63 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO POLYPROPYLENE (M) SDN. BHD., w.e.f.:- 8.8.2011-7.8.2013 KUANTAN, PAHANG) ORDER 2011 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 264/2011 Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 DOUBLE TAXATION RELIEF (THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF QATAR) w.e.f.:- 22.7.2011 (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION [FGN (NS) 885/1957] 261/2011 Issued under s.132(1), Income Tax Act 1967 and s.65A(1), Petroleum (Income Tax) Act PROCLAMATION BY HIS MAJESTY THE YANG DI-PERTUAN AGONG, BY THE 1967. GRACE OF ALLAH, SUPREME HEAD OF THE STATES AND TERRITORIES OF w.e.f.:- 6.8.2011 MALAYSIA. INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 219/2011 Notes:- All citizens of Malaysia who, on the date of this proclamation, have attained the INCOME TAX (EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION) RULES 2011 age of sixteen years and five months but have not attained the age of eighteen years Issued under ss.132(2) and 154(1)(c), Income Tax Act 1967 are directed to be liable to undergo national service training under the National Service Notes:- Revokes the Income Tax (Request for Information) Rules 2009 [P.U.(A) 311/2009] Training Act 2003. w.e.f.:- 2.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 4.7.2011 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 205/2011 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 281/2011 INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (EAST COAST EXPRESSWAY-PHASE 2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.127(3)(b), Income Tax Act 1967 Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 Notes:- Exempts any person in the basis period for a year of assessment in relation to w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 gains or profits received,in lieu of interest, derived from the sukuk wakala under the FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 201/2011 concept of Al-Wakala Bil Istismar. FEDERAL ROADS (KL-KUALA SELANGOR EXPRESSWAY) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- y/a 2011- Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 325/2011 w.e.f.:- 23.6.2011 INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) (NO.5) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 280/2011 Issued under s.127(3)(b), Income Tax Act 1967 FEDERAL ROADS (KEMUNING-SHAH ALAM HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER Notes:- This order8 shall apply to a person who has obtained his first green building 2011 index certificate issued on or after 24 October 2009 but not later than 31 December Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 2014 by the Board of Architects Malaysia in respect of: Notes:- Amends para.2 and Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 31/2009] (a) any building constructed , owned and used by the person for the purpose of his w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 business; and (b) any building constructed: FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 290/2011 (i) under a privatization project and private financing initiatives approved FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.10) ORDER 2011 by the Privatisation/PFI Committee, Public Private Partnership Unit, Prime Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 Minister’s Department; and Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] (ii) pursuant to an agreement entered into between the person and the w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 Government of Malaysia or a statutory authority on a build-lease- FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 321/2011 maintain-transfer basis or any other similar arrangement and for which no FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALASYIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.11) ORDER 2011 consideration has been paid by the Government of Malaysia or a statutory Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 authority to that person. Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] w.e.f.:- y/a 2009- w.e.f.:- 13.9.2011 INSURANCE ACT 1996 [ACT 553] 246/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 279/2011 INSURANCE (EXEMPTION) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KEMUNING- Issued under s.198, Insurance Act 1996 SHAH ALAM HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Notes:- The Scheme insurers, in the case of the death of a person insured under a Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 group policy of the Scheme, are exempted from subsection 186(4) of the Act in order Notes:- Amends para.2,3,Sch.1 and 2, [P.U.(A) 163/2010] that payment of moneys due under the group policy is paid to Yayasan Kebajikan w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 Negara, who shall receive and distribute such moneys on behalf of the person insured in accordance with applicable distribution laws. FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 263/2011 w.e.f.:- 21.7.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KL-KUALA SELANGOR EXPRESSWAY) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 79 Bar Updates/Notices

LAND PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACT 2010 [ACT 715] 276/2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE ACT 2005 [ACT 645] 297/2011 LAND PUBLIC TRANSPORT (COMPOUNDING OF OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE (DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE) (HISTORICAL Issued under s.252(1)(e), Land Public Transport Act 2010 OBJECT) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 Notes:- The Commercial Vehicles Licensing Board (Compounding of Offences) Rules Issued under s.67(1), National Heritage Act 2005 2003 [P.U.(A) 54/2003] are revoked in respect of their application to Peninsular Malaysia. Notes:- The National Emblem, The National Anthem and The Proclamation of w.e.f.:- 17.8.2011 Independence 1957 listed in the Register are declared to be National Heritage. LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) ACT 1965 [ACT 96] 301/2011 w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011 LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) (REMISSION OF TAX AND STAMP NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD ACT 2009 [ACT 692] 197/2011 DUTY) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD (GRADES AND MINIMUM PRICES) Issued under s.10(1), Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) Act 1965 (FLUE-CURED TOBACCO) REGULATIONS 2011 Notes:- Any tax payable under the Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] shall be remitted in Issued under s.91(2)(n), National Kenaf and Tobacco Board Act 2009 full in respect of the Facility Agreement made between SRC International Sdn. Bhd. (the Notes:- Repeals the Tobacco (Grading and Pricing) Regulations 1975, [P.U.(A) 7/1975] “Borrower”) and Kumpulan Wang Persaraan (Diperbadankan) (the “Lender”)in relation w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 to the provision of a term loan facility (the “Facility”) of up to the aggregate amount NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD ACT 2009 [ACT 692] 198/2011 of two billion ringgit (RM2,000,000,000.00) to the Borrower. NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD (LICENSING OF KENAF AND KENAF w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011 PRODUCTS) REGULATIONS 2011 LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) ACT 1965 [ACT 96] 300/2011 Issued under s.91(2)(a), National Kenaf and Tobacco Board Act 2009 LOANS GUARANTEE (DECLARATION OF BODIES CORPORATE) (SRC w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 INTERNATIONAL SDN. BHD.) ORDER 2011 NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD ACT 2009 [ACT 692] 199/2011 Issued under s.3, Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) Act 1965 NATIONAL KENAF AND TOBACCO BOARD (LICENSING OF TOBACCO AND Notes:- The body corporate known as SRC International Sdn. Bhd. is declared to be a TOBACCO PRODUCTS) REGULATIONS 2011 body corporate to which the Act applies. Issued under s.91(2)(a), National Kenaf and Tobacco Board Act 2009 w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011 Notes:- Repeals the Tobacco Industry (Licensing) Rules 1990 [P.U.(A) 44/1990] MALAYSIA ACT 1963 [ACT 26/1963] 234/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 STATE OF SABAH (EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF THE SECOND-HAND NATIONAL SERVICE TRAINING ACT 2003 [ACT 628] 262/2011 DEALERS ACT 1946) ORDER 2011 NATIONAL SERVICE TRAINING (PERSONS REQUIRED TO UNDERGO NATIONAL Issued under s.74, Malaysia Act 1963 SERVICE TRAINING) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 12.7.2011 Issued under s.16, National Service Training Act 2003 MALAYSIA ACT 1963 [ACT 26/1963] 233/2011 w.e.f.:- 5.8.2011 STATE OF SARAWAK (EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF THE SECOND-HAND OPTICAL ACT 1991 [ACT 469] 207/2011 DEALERS ACT 1946) ORDER 2011 OPTICAL (AMENDMENT OF SECOND SCHEDULE) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.74, Malaysia Act 1963 Issued under s.41, Optical Act 1991 w.e.f.:- 12.7.2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.2, Optical Act 1991 MALAYSIAN BIOFUEL INDUSTRY ACT 2007 [ACT 666] 203/2011 w.e.f.:- 29.6.2011 MALAYSIAN BIOFUEL INDUSTRY (BLENDING PERCENTAGE AND MANDATORY PASSPORT ACT 1966 [ACT 150] 268/2011 USE) REGULATIONS 2011 PASSPORT (EXEMPTION) (ASYLUM SEEKERS) ORDER 2011 Issued under ss.4(a) and (b), Malaysian Biofuel Industry Act 2007 Issued under s.4, Passport Act 1966 w.e.f.:- 8.8.2011-7.8.2013 MALAYSIA DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION ACT 2011 [ACT 720] 288/2011 PESTICIDES ACT 1974 [ACT 149] 235/2011 MALAYSIA DEPOSIT- INSURANCE CORPORATION (ALLOCATION OF EXPENSES, PESTICIDES (AMENDMENT OF FIRST SCHEDULE) ORDER 2011 COSTS OR LOSSES) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.58, Pesticides Act 1974 Issued under s.28(2), Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation Act 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, Pesticides Act 1974 w.e.f.:- y/a ass 2011- w.e.f.:- 12.7.2011 MINISTERIAL FUNCTIONS ACT 1969 [ACT 2] 227/2011 PETROLEUM (INCOME TAX) ACT 1967 [ACT 543] 264/2011 MINISTERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 DOUBLE TAXATION RELIEF (THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF QATAR) Issued under s.2, Ministerial Functions Act 1969 (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch., [P.U.(A) 222/2009] Issued under s.65A(1), Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967and s.132(1), Income Tax Act w.e.f.:- 22.10.2010 - subparagraph 2(a) regarding Talent Corporation Malaysia Berhad. 1967. w.e.f.:- 2.2.2011 - subparagraph 2(a) regarding Teraju Bumiputera Corporation. w.e.f.:- 6.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 13.11.2009 - subparagraph 2(b)(i) and 2(b)(ii) POISONS ACT 1952 [ACT 366] 266/2011 MINISTERIAL FUNCTIONS ACT 1969 [ACT 2] 228/2011 POISONS (AMENDMENT OF POISONS LIST) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 MINISTERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.6, Poisons Act 1952 Issued under s.2, Ministerial Functions Act 1969 Notes:- Amends Sch.1 and Appendix to the Poisons List. Notes:- Amends Sch., [P.U.(A) 222/2009] w.e.f.:- 9.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 11.6.2010 PORT AUTHORITY ACT 1963 [ACT 488] 278/2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE ACT 2005 [ACT 645] 229/2011 JOHOR PORT AUTHORITY (SCALE OF CHARGES) (AMENDMENT) BY-LAWS 2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE (DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE) (HERITAGE SITE) Issued under ss.16 and 29, Port Authority Act 1963 ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.3, [P.U.(A) 175/2011] Issued under s.67(1), National Heritage Act 2005 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 8.7.2011 PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES ACT 1988 [ACT 342] 206/2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE ACT 2005 [ACT 645] 277/2011 PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES (NOTICE FORM) NATIONAL HERITAGE (DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE) (HERITAGE SITE) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.31, Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988 Issued under s.67(1), National Heritage Act 2005 Notes:- Amends reg.2, [P.U.(A) 328/1993] Notes:- Federal Lands Commissioner, Lot 404,403,32,55,502,503 and 97 Istana Negara; w.e.f.:- 29.6.2011 Melaka Islamic Religious Council, Lot 61, Kampung Keling Mosque, Jalan Tukang Emas; Melaka Islamic Religious Council, Lot 37, Masjid Kampong Hulu declared to be National PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 [ACT 723] 285/2011 Heritage. PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING (FIXING OF MAXIMUM PRICE AND w.e.f.:- 19.8.2011 PRICE MARKING OF PRICE-CONTROLLED GOODS) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 Issued under ss.4 and 10, Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE ACT 2005 [ACT 645] 295/2011 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011-6.9.2011 NATIONAL HERITAGE (DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE) (HISTORICAL OBJECT) ORDER 2011 PRINTING PRESSES AND PUBLICATIONS ACT 1984 [ACT 301] 230/2011 Issued under s.67(1), National Heritage Act 2005 PRINTING PRESSES AND PUBLICATIONS (CONTROL OF UNDESIRABLE Notes:- The Mace of the House Representatives, The Mace of the Senate listed in the PUBLICATIONS) ORDER 2011 Register are declared to be National Heritage. Issued under s.7(1), Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011 Notes:- The printing, importation, production, reproduction, publishing, sale, issue, circulation, distribution or possession of ISLAM EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD, Felibri NATIONAL HERITAGE ACT 2005 [ACT 645] 296/2011 Publications are absolutely prohibited throughout Malaysia. NATIONAL HERITAGE (DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE) (HISTORICAL w.e.f.:- 8.7.2011 OBJECT) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.67(1), National Heritage Act 2005 REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS ACT 1951 [ACT 371] 245/2011 Notes:- Manuskrip Hikayat Hang Tuah, has been declared as a heritage object and listed REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS (AMENDMENT OF FIRST SCHEDULE) (NO.2) in the Register is declared to be a National Heritage. ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 25.8.2011 Issued under s.6(3), Registration of Pharmacists Act 1951 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, Registration of Pharmacists Act 1951 w.e.f.:- 21.7.2011

80 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Bar Updates/Notices

REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS ACT 1951 [ACT 371] 248/2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 308/2011 REGISTRATION OF PHARMACIST (AMENDMENT OF SECOND SCHEDULE) ORDER SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (MANNER OF APPEAL) 2011 CORRIGENDUM REGULATIONS 2011 Notes:- Corrigendum to [P.U.(A) 147/2011] - Corrects by substituting for the word Issued under ss.13 and 29, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 “Beufort” appearing in subparagraph 2(a) the word “Beaufort”. w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 291/2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 302/2011 LOCAL SPEED LIMIT (FEDERAL ROADS) (SPECIFIED TIME PROHIBITION) (NO.2) SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (PRESCRIBED SOLID ORDER 2011 WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AND APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, Issued under s.69(2), Road Transport Act 1987 ALTERATION AND CLOSURE OF FACILITIES) REGULATIONS 2011 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011-6.9.2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 202/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 307/2011 Issued under s.69(1), Road Transport Act 1987 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (SCHEME FOR Notes:- Amends Sch., [P.U.(A) 18/1989] HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE AND SOLID WASTE SIMILAR TO HOUSEHOLD SOLID w.e.f.:- 23.6.2011 WASTE) REGULATIONS 2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 282/2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT (AMENDMENT) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 Issued under s.69(1), Road Transport Act 1987 SUBORDINATE COURTS RULES ACT 1955 [ACT 55] 211/2011 Notes:- Amends Sch, [P.U.(A) 18/1989] SUBORDINATE COURTS (AMENDMENT) RULES 2011 w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 Issued under s.4, Subordinate Courts Rules Act 1955 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 293/2011 Notes:- General Amendment:- substitutes for the words “8 per centum” wherever they NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT (AMENDMENT) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 appear the words “4 per centum”. Issued under s.69(1), Road Transport Act 1987 - Amends O.1,O.46,O.49,O.53 and Sch.A Notes:- Amends Sch., [P.U.(A) 18/1989] w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011 - rules 3,5 and 6 (O.1,49,53) w.e.f.:- 22.8.2011 w.e.f.:- 30.6.2011 - remaining rules. (General Amendment, O.46 and Sch.A) ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 292/2011 SYARIAH COURT CIVIL PROCEDURE (FEDERAL TERRITORIES) ACT 1998 [ACT 585] 258/2011 NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT (TEMPORARY CESSATION) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 SYARIAH COURT CIVIL PROCEDURE (COSTS AND ALLOWANCES) (FEDERAL Issued under s.69(1), Road Transport Act 1987 TERRITORIES) RULES 2011 w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011-6.9.2011 Issued under s.247(1)(b), Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998 w.e.f.:- 2.8.2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 317/2011 ROAD TRANSPORT (PROHIBITION OF USE OF ROAD) (FEDERAL ROADS) ORDER SYARIAH COURT CIVIL PROCEDURE (FEDERAL TERRITORIES) ACT 1998 [ACT 585] 257/2011 2011 SYARIAH COURT CIVIL PROCEDURE (FEES) (FEDERAL TERRITORIES) RULES 2011 Issued under ss.70(1) and (2), Road Transport Act 1987 Issued under s.247(1)(b), Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998 w.e.f.:- 5.9.2011 w.e.f.:- 2.8.2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 314/2011 UNIVERSITIES AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGES ACT 1971 [ACT 30] 220/2011 ROAD TRAFFIC (PROHIBITION ON DRIVING OF GOODS VEHICLES) (NO.2) RULES THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA 2011 Issued under s.8, Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 Issued under s.88(1)(c), Road Transport Act 1987 w.e.f.:- 1.2.2009 w.e.f.:- 27.8.2011 UNIVERSITIES AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGES ACT 1971 [ACT 30] 222/2011 SALES TAX ACT 1972 [ACT 64] 289/2011 UNIVERSITIES AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGES (VARIATION OF, AND ADDITION TO, SALES TAX (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 THE CONSTITUTION) (UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.61, Sales Tax Act 1972 Issued under s.26(b), Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 Notes:- Amends Sch.2, [P.U.(A) 55/1972] Notes:- The provisions of the Constitution as specified in column (1) of the Schedule are w.e.f.:- 16.3.2009 amended in the manner described in column (2) for the purpose of its application to the Constitution of the Universiti Sains Malaysia. SERVICE TAX ACT 1972 [ACT 151] 287/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.2.2009 SERVICE TAX (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 Issued under s.41, Service Tax Act 1975 UNIVERSITIES AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGES ACT 1971 [ACT 30] 221/2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.3, [P.U.(A) 52/1975] UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 16.3.2009 Issued under s.26(a), Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 Notes:- The Yang di-Pertuan Agong exempts Universiti Sains Malaysia which is subject SOCIETIES ACT 1966 [ACT 335] 224/2011 to the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 from the application of the definition ORDER UNDER SECTION 5 of ‘student’ in section 2 and application of subsections 16B(9) and (11) of the Act. Issued under s.5(1), Societies Act 1966 w.e.f.:- 1.2.2009 Notes:- Coalition for Clean and Fair Election (BERSIH) movement declared as an unlawful society. WAGES COUNCILS ACT 1947 [ACT 195] 254/2011 w.e.f.:- 2.7.2011 WAGES COUNCILS (WAGES REGULATION ORDER) (STATUTORY MINIMUM REMUNERATION OF PRIVATE SECURITY GUARD IN SARAWAK AND SABAH) SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 309/2011 ORDER 2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (COMPOUNDING OF Issued under s.12(3), Wages Councils Act 1947 OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.8.2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 304/2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (LICENSING) LATEST INDEX TO SELECTED (MANAGEMENT OR OPERATION OF PRESCRIBED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT P.U.(B) SERIES 2011 FACILITIES) REGULATIONS 2011 As at 26 Sept 2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 P.U.(B) Title NO. SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 303/2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (LICENSING) ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 [ACT A1395] 342/2011 UNDERTAKING OR PROVISION OF COLLECTION SERVICES FOR HOUSEHOLD SOLID APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION WASTE, PUBLIC SOLID WASTE, PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL SOLID WASTE AND SOLID Notes:- 1 July 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1395 comes into operation. WASTE SIMILAR TO HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE) REGULATIONS 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 ARMS ACT 1960 [ACT 206] 442/2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 306/2011 EXEMPTION FROM PARAGRAPHS 5(1)(a) AND (b) SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (LICENSING) Notes:- Exempts His Royal Highness Tengku Abdullah Al-Haj Ibni Sultan Haji Ahmad UNDERTAKING OR PROVISION OF PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT SERVICES) Shah Al- Musta’in Billah from the application of paragraphs 5(1)(a) and (b) of the Act REGULATIONS 2011 in respect of arms and ammunition intended solely for the purpose of protection and Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 safety of His Royal Highness, The Royal family and The Palace under the sovereignty of w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 the state of Pahang. SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 305/2011 w.e.f.:- 13.8.2011 SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT (LICENSING) UNDERTAKING OR PROVISION OF TRANSPORTATIONS SERVICES BY LONG HAULAGE) REGULATIONS 2011 Issued under s.108, Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011

Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 81 Bar Updates/Notices

BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT 1989 [ACT 372] 480/2011 NATIONAL VISUAL ARTS DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACT 2011 [ACT 724] 463/2011 NOTICE UNDER SUBSECTION 12(4) APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Notes:- The bank gives notice of the surrender of licence by EON Bank Berhad on 1 Notes:- 27 August 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act 724 comes into July 2011. operation. w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 w.e.f.:- 27.8.2011 CO-OPERATIVE COLLEGE (INCORPORATION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 [ACT 494/2011 NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL ACT 2011 [ACT 732] 507/2011 A1398] APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Notes:- 23 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act 732 comes into Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1398 comes into operation. operation. w.e.f.:- 23.9.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 346/2011 COURTS OF JUDICATURE ACT 1964 [ACT 91] 461/2011 APPOINTMENT OF LOCK-UPS TO BE PLACE OF CONFINEMENT SEAL OF THE HIGH COURT IN MALAYA Notes:- Lock-up in the Shah Alam District Police Station Headquarters, Selangor to Notes:- Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya prescribes that the seal to be used be a place for the confinement of persons remanded or sentenced to such terms of in the High Court in Malaya may be in the form of rubber stamp, embossed stamp or imprisonment not exceeding one month. electronically-generated stamp as specified in the Schedule. w.e.f.:- 7.7.2011 - Revokes [P.U.(B) 226/2001] PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 347/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011 APPOINTMENT OF LOCK-UPS TO BE PLACES OF CONFINEMENT JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION ACT 2009 [ACT 695] 460/2011 Notes:- Lokap Balai Polis Selangau, Sarawak and Lokap Balai Polis Seksyen 9 Shah Alam, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION Selangor to be places for the confinement of persons remanded or sentenced to such Notes:- Tan Sri Dato’ Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan/ terms of imprisonment not exceeding one month. Federal Court Judge, Tun Dato’ Seri Abdul Hamid bin Haji Mohamad, Dato’ Seri Ainum w.e.f.:- 7.7.2011 binti Mohd Saaid, Tan Sri Datuk Wira Dr. Lal Chand Vohrah and Tan Sri Datuk Amar PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 406/2011 Steve Shim Lip Kiong appointed as members of the Judicial Appointments Commission. APPOINTMENT OF LOCK-UPS TO BE PLACES OF CONFINEMENT w.e.f.:- 10.2.2011-9.2.2013 Notes:- Lokap Kompleks Mahkamah Pasir Mas Kelantan, Lokap Balai Polis Tanjung KOOTU FUNDS (PROHIBITION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 [ACT A1397] 458/2011 Gemok, Pahang to be places for the confinement of persons remanded or sentenced to APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION such terms of imprisonment not exceeding one month. Notes:- 16 August 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1397 comes into w.e.f.:- 4.8.2011 operation. REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS ACT 1951 [ACT 371] 364/2011 w.e.f.:- 16.8.2011 NOTIFICATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11E LOCAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 [ACT A1311] 488/2011 Notes:- Exempts the following persons from the requirement of section 11D: APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION (a) any person who holds a Doctor of Philosophy in pharmacy; or Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1311 comes into (b) any person who holds a certificate issued by the Board of Pharmaceutical operation in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Malacca and Johore. Specialties, United States of America. w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 w.e.f.:- 19.7.2011 LOCAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 [ACT A1311] 491/2011 SAFEGUARDS ACT 2006 [ACT 657] 385/2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR MAKING PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1311 comes into WITH REGARD TO THE INVESTIGATION ON HOT ROLLED COILS IMPORTED INTO operation in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya. MALAYSIA w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 w.e.f.:- 29.7.2011 MALAYSIAN CHAMBER OF MINES INCORPORATION ACT 1914 [ACT 367] 366/2011 SAFEGUARDS ACT 2006 [ACT 657] 465/2011 NOTIFICATION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 15 NOTICE OF NEGATIVE PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION WITH REGARD TO THE Notes:- The Minister has approved the alteration to the by-laws 10 of the Malaysian INVESTIGATION ON HOT ROLLED COILS IMPORTED INTO MALAYSIA (SM 01/11) Chambers of Mines By-Laws 1934 in paragraph (e) by substituting for the words “RM50” w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011 the words “RM120”. SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT ACT 2007 [ACT 672] 490/2011 w.e.f.:- 21.7.2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS ACT 2002 [ACT 621] 341/2011 Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act 672 comes into SPECIAL DIRECTION OF THE MINISTER operation in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Malacca and Johore, Notes:- Minister responsible for legal affairs in Malaysia, do direct that the provisions of and the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya. the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2002 be applied in relation to the request w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 for mutual assistance in relation to that criminal matter as if there is in effect in respect STREET, DRAINAGE AND BUILDING (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 [ACT A1312] 489/2011 of Liechtenstein an order made under section 17 of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Matters Act 2002 without any restriction, limitation, exception ,modification ,adaptation Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1312 comes into ,condition or qualification. operation in the States of Perlis, Kedah, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Malacca and Johore. w.e.f.:- 28.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS ACT 2002 [ACT 621] 459/2011 STREET, DRAINAGE AND BUILDING (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 [ACT A1312] 492/2011 SPECIAL DIRECTION OF THE MINISTER APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Notes:- The Minister responsible for legal affairs in Malaysia, do direct that the provisions Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1312 comes into of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2002 be applied in relation to the operation in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya. request for mutual assistance in relation to that criminal matter as if there is in effect in w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 respect of the Republic of India an order made under section 17 of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2002 without any restriction, limitation, exception, modification, adaptation, condition or qualification. SUBORDINATE COURTS ACT 1948 [ACT 92] 462/2011 w.e.f.:- 18.8.2011 SEAL OF THE SUBORDINATE COURTS IN PENINSULAR MALAYSIA Notes:- Revokes [L.N. 191/1958] NATIONAL LANGUAGE ACTS 1963/67 [ACT 32] 338/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.3.2011 PRESCRIPTION UNDER SECTION 6 Notes:- The authoritative text of the Limited Liability Partnership Bill 2011 introduced SUSTAINABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT 2011 [ACT 726] 495/2011 in the Second Meeting of the Fourth Session of the Twelfth Parliament is the text in the APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION English language. Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act 726 comes into w.e.f.:- 25.6.2011 operation throughout Malaysia except for the State of Sarawak. w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011 NATIONAL SPORTS INSTITUTE ACT 2011 [ACT 729] 503/2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (AMENDMENT) ACT 2007 [ACT A1313] 493/2011 Notes:- 16 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act 729 comes into APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION operation. Notes:- 1 September 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1313 comes into w.e.f.:- 16.9.2011 operation in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya. w.e.f.:- 1.9.2011

82 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011 Special Promotion to the Members of Malaysian Bar

1. 25% off on tailored suit 3. 10% off on winged collared shirt’s 2. 20% off on robes

terms and condition apply

Jason’s Men Shop or formerly known as King’s Men shop has been around for the past 40 years and it’s a family business which specializes in made to measure clothes to fit a particular person. Every customer is treated individually to ensure perfection. In addition to our many Men’s suit, we provide our customers a fine selection of neckties to compliment their looks and add a dash of style and colour to their most classically tailored outfit.

Legal Wear & Shirts Lawyer robes and accessories are manufactured to the highest standards. The shirts, bands, collars and studs are all produced using traditional methods ensuring standards are maintained as they have been over the years.

Ready made winged collared shirts also available

Jason’s Men Shop specializes in bulk orders (corporate uniforms for firms)

244 & 245 (1st Floor), Ampang Park, Jalan Ampang, 50450 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: +603-2161 5091 Fax: +603-2181 0860 Email: [email protected], [email protected] Business Hours: Mon-Sun 12.30pm-9.30pm www.jasonsmenshop.com

JAMALIAH & PARTNERS Advocates & Solicitors

We are a well established law firm specialising in conveyancing practice and syarie family law.

We seek suitable candidates for the post of:-

Requirements:

• Minimum 2 years’ related experience • Familiar with Sale and Purchase Agreement and Facility Documentations • Good working attitude and communication skill • Able to work independently with minimum supervision

Attractive remuneration package, opportunity for career development

Interested candidates, please email your application / resume to [email protected] or fax 03-55117281 Bar Updates/Notices DISCIPLINARY ORDERS (June – July 2011) STRUCK OFF (4) Joseph a/l Sebestian (J/171) Bar Council initiated proceedings under section 88A of the Legal SA NO NAME ORDER DATED (to take effect 21 days Profession Act 1976. High Court granted Order in Terms on 4 Mar from date of Order) 2011. Appeal to set aside the suspension Order dated 4 Mar 2011 C/144 Che Man b Che Mud 23 June 2011 dismissed on 23 June 2011. Appeal to Federal Court dismissed on Z/191 Zubaidah Begum bt Mukhtar Ahmad 24 June 2011 23 Aug 2011. (Further ordered to pay RM554,910.23 to the complainant within three months from the date of the Order) Notice – Order for Contempt M/1226 Mohd Zaki b Abdul Wahab 29 July 2011 Annamala a/p N Thananayagam (A/437) On 13 Apr 2007, contempt proceedings against Annamala FINED a/p N Thananayagam for breach of an injunction order were SA NO NAME ORDER DATED FINED initiated by Bar Council. On 7 May 2009, High Court ordered (RM) that Annamala a/p N Thananayagam be imprisoned for a

C/147 Chua Keng Hock 23 June 2011 1,000 period of six months. Y/472 Yeoh Eng Khuang 23 June 2011 1,000 (Further ordered to refund RM370 to the As at 26 Sept 2011 complainant within three months from date of order) A/492 Amir Asree b Meor Nordin 24 June 2011 1,000 A/1125 Ang Kwee Thian 24 June 2011 2,000 NOTICE REGARDING DOCUMENTS IN BAR H/447 Hamidon b Hayon 24 June 2011 3,000 COUNCIL’S CUSTODY: LEGAL FIRMS IN J/256 Jagesh s/o Ponnaiha @ Mehalingam 24 June 2011 50,000 WHICH BAR COUNCIL HAS INTERVENED L/723 Loi Lai Mee 29 July 2011 1,000 N/764 Ng Ann Gie 29 July 2011 4,000 When Bar Council intervenes in a legal firm pursuant to powers conferred by the Legal Profession Act 1976, it can take custody of documents that are within the S/975 Suneth a/l A Nadesan 29 July 2011 3,000 control or possession of the firm. Subsequently, Bar Council takes steps to notify S/213 Seah, Diana Ann 29 July 2011 3,000 clients and/or interested parties to collect their documents within the stipulated time period. However, many documents are uncollected and remain in Bar Council’s REPRIMANDED custody, such as those taken from the legal firms listed below. Clients or interested parties who wish to claim documents that relate to cases SA NO NAME ORDER DATED that were handled by these legal firms are advised to contact the Bar Council’s Intervention Department at 03-2050 2159. C/402 Chan Mee Leng 23 June 2011 N/726 Norazila bt Md Hilal 23 June 2011 (As at 9 Sept 2011) O/235 Oon Chee Kheng 23 June 2011 P/282 Phang Yan Chin 23 June 2011 Kuala Lumpur Messrs HK Teh & Assoc W/547 Wong Thian Choon 23 June 2011 Messrs Badri Kuhan Yeoh & Ghandi Messrs Sabri Nazli Lana & Azizan Messrs KE Ooi & Partners Messrs Penney Khoo Soh Ping & Co A/492 Amir Asree b Meor Nordin 24 June 2011 Messrs Anuar SJ Ong & Co Messrs Umar Baki & Co K/119 Kanawagi Seperumaniam 24 June 2011 Messrs Adi Azhar Messrs Cheong & Chong L/1101 Lim Tee Pok 24 June 2011 Messrs BC Low Messrs Hassan Kuldeep & Co Messrs Sooriyar & Co Messrs Khalil Samsuni & Co S/132 SA Ponmugam 24 June 2011 Messrs YH Chan & Co Malacca S/1970 Siti Aminah bt Zakaria 24 June 2011 Messrs Shaik Anwar Raja Messrs Ang Kwee Thian & Associates N/1192 Noor Roaziha bt Mohd Noor 30 July 2011 Messrs PL Low & Co Messrs Tuah Hilmy & Hazudin Messrs Wan Nizar Rais Messrs Parthan & Associates Messrs Par Govind & Co Messrs YC Pok & Zurina Update on Appeals against Disciplinary Messrs Hadi & Co Messrs Ganesan Mariapan & Co Orders Messrs Michael Lim & Assoc Pahang Messrs Yusuf Abdul Rahman & Co Messrs Zul & Co Messrs Mohd Zawawi Amelda & Partners Johore (1) Rohaizat b Othman (R/360) Messrs CK Kow & Co Messrs Baharuddin & Partners Struck off the Roll by Order dated 7 Mar 2008. Appeal to High Messrs Nazli Ghazali & Cheong Messrs Rosli Rahman & Co Messrs Zaim Al-Amin & Assoc Messrs JL Lim & Co Court dismissed with costs on 12 Aug 2009. Court of Appeal Messrs Su How & Co Messrs Ooi Sun Nee struck off the appeal on 31 Jan 2011. Messrs MW Lian & Assoc Messrs Mariam & Co Messrs Zihin Shariff & Partners Messrs KY Teo & Associates Messrs Khalid Chung & Shankar Negeri Sembilan (2) Shaari b Haji Md Nor (S/174) Messrs Nordin Hamid & Co Suspended for 12 months by Order dated 20 Nov 2010. Appeal Messrs Raja Rohana & Co Messrs M Kuppusamy & Co to High Court dismissed with no order as to costs on 1 July 2011. Messrs Abdullah-Haniff & Assoc Messrs Sasi Kumar & Assoc Messrs Andrew Lee & Co Application for a rehearing against High Court decision dated 1 Messrs SF Leow Selangor Messrs Azizi Nizam & Anwar July 2011 dismissed by High Court on 2 Aug 2011. Messrs Zubaidah Mukhtar Ahmad Perak Messrs S Letchumanan & H Nizam Messrs Ravi Nair Maideen & Assoc (3) Rajasekaran a/l R Thiyagarajan (R/294) Messrs Bhaarathee & Associates Messrs Mohd Azhar & Co Messrs Zainal Rashid & Partners Kedah/Perlis Reprimand Order issued by the Disciplinary Board on 20 Nov Messrs Jaharberdeen & Ngo Messrs Jamaludin Amin & Co 2010. Appeal allowed with costs on 26 Aug 2011. Messrs Jauhari & Assoc

84 Praxis OCT-DEC 2011