CLP, CBC and CBE

Rakan blogger yang juga sepatutnya rakan SeTPM saya, Ikmal telah menulis komen dalam blog beliau berkenaan pemansuhan peperiksaan CLP (Certificate of Legal Practice) dan pengenalan system kursus CBC (Common Bar Course) dan peperiksaan CBE (Common Bar Examination). Saya dapati terlalu banyak komen yang agak sinis, tajam dan bebal ditujukan kepada pendapat sahabat saya. Bebal kerana terdapat ramai rakyat Malaysia yang kononnya pengamal and pelajar undang-undang masih dibelenggu dengan sikap perkauman yang menebal.

 

Here are my comments on this matter albeit a bit late.

 

Recently the Malaysian de facto law minister made a statement with regards the scrapping of the CLP and the introduction of the CBC and CBE. It is stated that the introduction of this new system will help usher a golden age of Malaysian legal services as it will help enhance the quality of lawyer i.e. law practitioners all over Malaysia thus realising the judicial reform.

 

Unlike the CLP, this new system will be implemented to all law graduates regardless of from where their qualifications are obtained. For now it can be said that local graduates, not local graduates with foreign degree, enjoys exemption from the CLP. A local graduate can automatically starts his or her pupillage (reading in chambers) without having to first pass the CLP examination.

 

In the future, if the CBC and CBE be successfully implemented, the local law graduates can kiss their ‘special privilege’ goodbye thanks to de facto Law Minister who himself came from the local law faculty as claimed by certain quarters of the local academia.

 

If the government thinks that CBC and CBE are to be one of the cure for the illness of our legal system I have to submit that they have erred in their thinking. The rot that inhibits the Malaysian legal system is not caused by the lack of academic qualification amongst the members of that system. All the stories of the legal rot that includes backlog of cases, unprofessional act of the lawyers etc occurs in our system due to reasons which are too many or too broad to be discussed but the root of the rot can be traced back to the human trait of greed which causes corruption and abandonment of ethics and morality in their personal pursuit of happiness.

 

In order to restore the splendour of the legal system the rot must be curbed if not stopped. So the question that arises now is how to fight this elusive creature called corruption. By taking harsh action against the corrupted? By inculcating good values in the hearts of officers of the system? By conducting frequent exorcisms of officers of the legal system to get rid the corrupting demons in their hearts? Or by making a standard Bar exam as a prerequisite to enable a person to practice law in this country?

 

Referring to the above suggestions, the first is a total bull-poop due to the fact that in Malaysia it seems that there is no ‘real’ action be taken against the corrupts. Even with glaring evidence both factual and circumstantial, for example a multi million Ringgit palatial home build in a low cost area, our esteemed investigators and prosecutors seem to usually fail to nail the case. The second suggestion is another bull-poop, there is no way the officers can be inculcated with good value due to the fact that the shoot has already become a bamboo (rebung sudah menjadi buluh). The third suggestion may work due to the increasing beliefs in the supernatural nowadays (pun intended).

 

The fourth suggestion is the worst bull of all. An academically inclined course and examination such as the CBC and CBE can never be the instrument to enhance the legal profession. They are only paper qualification. And such thing cannot ensure inculcation of professionalism. You can never know a person by only looking at his papers. However outstanding his or her result would be it is wrong to equate a person’s capability in passing exams with his inherent character. Answering exams requires a man to be in touch with his mind and his ability to memorize and it never requires a man to search for answers using his heart, moral and empathy. 

 

I wish to say that the introduction of this new system will burden our local law graduates. Different from their overseas brethren, their duration of study is one year longer. I understand through my own experience that this one year is used by the law faculties nationwide to teach and test prospective law graduates in practical syllabuses rather than theoretical which subjects are case specifics to the legal institution of this country such as civil and criminal procedures.

 

In the legal world, sound knowledge of procedures of law is the best armament a lawyer can have in order for him to be competent, efficient and professional in his work. The local graduates have this knowledge which is of course tested by the local universities thus giving them an advantage over their foreign trained counterparts. If this advantage is not to be recognised by the government then I dare say that those who walk the corridors of power have no regard and consideration for the situation of local law graduates, the local law faculties and the local legal academia as a whole.

 

Implementing this new system will never give positive even minute effect to the effort of the government in the judicial reform. I see it as an appeasement action done by the government to appease some quarter of the public which criticise and loathe the CLP system. If this is true then I think that they are now appeased and pleased with the government who is now hungry for support, respect and recognition.

 

Local law graduates need to voice out their concerns with regard to this matter, unless they agree to allow themselves to be burdened with this new system which will costs them their time, effort and money. This proposal must be reconsidered.