Saturday, February 21, 2015

Bar Council President rapped

Statement by Bar Council President, Christopher Leong to infer the conviction of Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim as persecution, was rapped by 100 lawyers today.

In a press conference, this morning, the lawyers released the following press conference to call for his resignation. Believed a police report will expect to follow.

The statement below: 



21 FEBRUARY 2015

WE, concerned members of the Bar, note with utter disbelief and amazement the Press Release of Christopher Leong of 11 February 2015, which implies that Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim was ‘persecuted, not prosecuted’ in respect of his charge and conviction by the Federal Court of Malaysia on 10 February 2015 for sodomy pursuant to Section 377B read with Section 377A, of the Penal Code.

Firstly, what is glaringly obvious from the said press release, is that, in one breath Christopher Leong admits having not read the judgment of the Federal Court, and yet in the same breath, the day after the Federal Court decision he makes disparaging remarks that the judgment of the Federal Court was without any basis in law, by reference to media reports of the trial, solely.

This is a direct attack on the Federal Court without any legal basis with the effect of bringing the Federal Court into disrepute and odium.

The stand and public statement made by Christopher Leong militates against the fundamental and statutory duties of the Malaysian Bar, which includes the protection of the integrity and sanctity of the judicial system.

Christopher Leong must appreciate the legal position that “trial by media” is not only wrong but must be abhorred in any civilised judicial system, since it is a fundamental requirement that the courts of law can only determine a dispute based on evidence presented in court and not otherwise. As cautioned by His Lordship Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof JC (as His Lordship then was) in the case of Dato’ Seri Ir. Hj. Mohammad Nizar Bin Jamaluddin v Dato’ Dr. Zambry Bin Abd. Kadir [2009] 1 LNS 1827:

“I believe the course of conduct I took falls quite closely with this recommended practice. It was not an outcome or a reaction against adverse comments on blogsites or certain sections of the mainstream media. It will be a sorry day for the judiciary if a judge’s conduct has to be conditioned by these extraneous factors, since they will fetter the independence of the judiciary unduly.”

Christopher Leong has brought the judiciary, a fundamental element in the administration of justice in Malaysia established under Article 121 of the Federal Constitution, into public contempt and ridicule by misrepresenting both facts and the law applicable in Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial and conviction by the Federal Court. He does this by questioning why the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, is not charged with abetment under Sections 377A and 377B read together with Section 109 of the Penal Code.

This is an utterly outrageous statement for even a lay person to make, what more a senior member and leader of the Malaysian legal profession.

As legal practitioners ourselves, we are outraged, nigh embarrassed, by his remark which clearly contravene not only the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 but also a statutory provision of the Legal Profession Act 1976, namely Section 42 which stipulates that the Malaysian Bar must “promote good relations ... in the administration of law and justice in Malaysia.”

Such a statement is wholly unbecoming and based on flawed reading of the provisions in the sections concerned.

A plain reading of Sections 377A and 377B of the Penal Code must certainly lead a reader thereof to conclude that the statutory provisions do not criminalise homosexuality per se but sodomy, namely the act of insertion by a man of his penis into the anus of another person, be that a man, woman or child. Such an act is considered vile by the values held by the vast majority of Malaysians and rightly attracts sanction.

This is common knowledge and must certainly be within the awareness of Christopher Leong, being the President of the Malaysian Bar.

Also, contrary to what he claims, the aforementioned provisions are in no way rarely used, but are used on a recurring basis, one such example being the previous conviction for sodomy of one Abd Rahim bin Abd Rahaman by the Court of Appeal in 2010 for multiple counts of sodomy.

The full statistics of cases of this nature is easily accessible by requesting the same from the other arm of the legal system being the Attorney General’s Office.

Did Mr Christopher Leong avail himself to these statistics, before making a brash and unsupported allegation?

Christopher Leong’s sanction and participation in the continued smear of the Malaysian judiciary in this matter, by irresponsible citizens as well as elements of the international community must be corrected immediately and to this end, we, concerned members of the Bar, CALL UPON MR CHRISTOPHER LEONG, PRESIDENT OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR TO IMMEDIATELY retract the Press Release dated 11 February 2015 AND to tender an unequivocal and unconditional public apology to the judiciary AND similarly to communicate the same to  all international bodies and entities, FAILING WHICH we shall be constrained to take all necessary steps to call for his immediate resignation from the position as President of the Malaysian Bar and call upon the Attorney General to take the necessary contempt proceeding against  Mr. Christopher Leong.

We also wish to place on record that in no way does the Press Release of Mr. Christopher Leong dated 11 February 2015 represent the views of the majority members of the Malaysian Bar.

Press Statement by concerned and currently practising members of the Malaysian Bar:-


As Rocky Bru wrote the other day, it is time for an alternative to the Bar Council. [Read here.]


maae said...

Hiding "behind Bar" - as if they're above the law. Of course Anwar can say anything now. But what about Chritopher Leong and Ambiga ? Sec. Parti Sosialis Rakyat already charged...

Where is AG ? Friends ? Friends don't do such damaging things, especially to our Negara.

Knock! Knock Majlis Peguam. Wake up ! Time for work and not politic ! Or better still gomen must recognise another new body...

Anonymous said...

Christopher leong should be charged under the sedition act for promoting and bringing disrepute to our democracy system. Funny, for a person who practice the system everyday, make profit out if it but yet couldn't have himself to believe in it. As a president of bar council i personally think christopher leong is a poser.


Jabalnur said...

I say syabas to these magnificient 100. Why about the rest? If these are tge only ones who dare to speak the truth and understand the Malaysian Law and its constitution, I wonder if the majority of lawyers are really qualified to represent themselves in our courts?
In fact, with the development of recent events including the case of a celebrated former convict, and the polemic over the constitution,
many common layman are able to interpret the Constitution better than tge si called "lawyers"
Its no wonder that one popular blogger aptly called these lawyers "loyar BERUK"

Anonymous said...

Press Statement
Chairman of SukaGuam,
Dato' Khairul Anwar Rahmat
21 Feb 2015

The uprising of lawyers against the fraudulent practices of the Bar Council: More than 100 lawyers signed a petition today, ending the pompousness of the Bar Council

1. Meeting one's match. Bar Council is now being strongly opposed by the majority of lawyers that want the body to stop confusing the public by distorting facts.

2. Lawyers from all over the country began its uprising today with 100 of the Bar Council members signing a petition urging the Bar Council president, Christopher Leong, to stop criticising the judiciary body or resign if he refuses to act professionally.

3. The superb support of over 100 lawyers that was garnered within only 2 days provides a clear signal to the President of the Bar Council to stop issuing statements at his whim as if the statement made is in representation of all the lawyers in the nation.

4. If the leadership of the Bar Council insist on testing the patience of the majority of the lawyers, they must anticipate the uprisings of lawyers throughout the country that has lost patience with the behaviour of the Bar Council that has veered off the original functions of the establishment.

5. The Bar Council is obligated to act without fear or favor, let alone exhibiting reckless inclination of support towards only one party in any trial.

6. Bear in mind the true philosophy behind advocacy is the presence of the advocates in courts are as 'officers of justice and truth' in aiding the courts to 'put the honest truth in its place' and to never 'uphold the impossible for their clients'.

7. In connection with this. lawyers nationwide that may want to express their support towards this petition are requested to contact SukaGuam Secretariat through its email for further action to be taken by them.

8. A series of roadshows to meet with lawyers and law graduates from all over the nation will be held to obtain further feedback particularly in the proposal to form another legal body as practiced by other nations'.

9. With the existence of more then one legal body, lawyers may choose which legal body they want to be in, thus allowing them to not be tied in a situation similar to what they are facing now where they are being implicated along with the negative actions of the Bar Council although they never once agreed to it.

Khairul Anwar Rahmat
Chairman of SukaGuam
Chief Secretariat of UMNO Legal Unit

Anonymous said...

"When I have a particular case in hand, and I have that motive and interest in the case, I feel an interest in ferreting out the questions to the bottom, love to dig up the question by the roots and hold it up and dry it before the fires of the mind."

"There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are necessarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appears improbable that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. Yet this impression is common, almost universal.
Hence let no young man who chooses the law for a calling for a moment yield to the popular belief - resolve to be honest in any event. And if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, then resolve to be honest without becoming a lawyer. Choose some other occupation, rather than one in which you would, in advance, consent to be an unscrupulous man."

- Counsels of Abraham Lincoln

Anonymous said...

While i do not like Christopher Leong and the past couple of Presidents for reasons that they cross selected each other. It is common knowledge that they are friends, and sort of passed the baton.

However Anwar's case has several issues which have caused us to be a joke globally. This is why the Bar Council president made a statement, persecuted.

I do not want to discuss the case here, but I only want to say this:-

Why don't you lawyers attend the AGM and vote, and for once out forward your own candidates of all positions.

Rocky's suggestion of an alternate council is ridiculous. Just take over the present one.


PlazaPelangi said...

With all due respect, I note that the list of the 100 "names" are dominated by one particular ethnic community. More than 95% per cent in fact.

I hope that this is not indicative of a Bar Council that is becoming split along ethnic/racial lines.

If an ethnic/racial divide exists in the Bar Council and, by extension, in the wider legal community, that would be a tragedy for Malaysia.

It would just give more ammunition to those from other countries and external institutions who criticise Malaysia.

As it is, Malaysia is not that highly ranked as far as the rule of law is concerned (World Justice Project report).

The US and Singapore, for all their reported faults and restrictions, are ranked higher.

The Malaysian legal sector is losing a significant amount of cross-border corporate work and talents to Singapore. That's a fact.

Having said that, the Bar Council should be more "professional" in it's approach.

And if it's leaders want to participate in the political process, they should resign their posts, revert to ordinary member status and join the political party of their choice. They can then engage in politics to their hearts' content.

And let the Bar Council revert to being a truly professional and respected body that will be of service in advancing the legal profession and legal sector in Malaysia.

Anonymous said...


yeah take over current Bar Council's exco selected by members who are 70% opposition supporters?

thats why rocky suggested to form another body, bodoh!

joepalooka said...

The Chairman of SukaGuam/Chief Secretariat of UMNO Legal Unit is not exactly a impartial and neutral observer, is he?

Is he "tainted" by being associated with THE political party that forms the backbone of the government and calls the shots with regard to government policies?

How is he any different from the Leong guy?

Anonymous said...


Why quote US and Singapore?? These 2 are supposedly first world countries.

The crux of this matter is simple. A young man lodged a sexual assault complaint against his employer.

Why turn it into a political case just because an aged sodomite believed in his invincibility.

Bar council had disgraced itself on previous incidents, the most notorious was when it arrogantly petitioned against retired judges defending clients.

Malaysian Bar had on March 15 2014 passed a resolution that supposedly prohibits ex-judges from showing up in court for their clients.

But when retired Federal Court judge Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram taking on the role of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s counsel in his Sodomy II appeal, hey presto the BC automatically became deaf dumb and mute.

Yes BC has to be destroyed for disgracing their professional ethics for political mileage.


Anonymous said...

joepalooka is another joker. That peliwat tua terkutuk accuses UMNO of a political conspiracy.

So of course UMNO has right of reply. Simple logic oso don know.

PlazaPelangi said...

Anon 12:55 PM

What's your point?

Do you think that setting up a "rival" body will give it instant credibility in the eyes of the public and the legal fraternity?

It will just be viewed as another offshoot of a toxic political process.

Therefore, zero credibility.

Next item, please.

Aidil Khalid said...


The chairman of SukaGuam/ Chief Secretariat of Umno legal unit did not speak on behalf of the 100 lawyers. In fact, he was not even among the 100 signatories of the petition. This UMNO joker is only trying to hijack the cause that was initiated by genuinely concerned, independent, individual members of the Bar. The following is the official statement by the G100 lawyers disassociating themselves from SukaGuam/UMNO:


22 FEBRUARY 2015

The group of 100 practising lawyers who signed the petition (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as G100) dated 21 February 2015 calling for the President of the Malaysian Bar to retract the press statement issued by him attacking the judiciary and administration of justice, and tender a public apology pursuant thereto, wishes to express and place the following on record:-

(i) G100 does not associate itself with the statements made by one Khairul Anwar Rahmat of SukaGuam as reported in several news portals implying and insinuating that G100 is in one way or another associated to the said association;

(ii) as much as G100 as a group of concerned, independent, individual members of the Bar calls for each members of the Bar to join in support of the petition regardless of their political leanings or beliefs, this effort and exercise is not headed or arranged by any organization, political or otherwise;

(iii) that being said, G100 has never mandated anyone or group other than its official spokesperson to issue statements on behalf of the one hundred lawyers. Instead, any further communication pursuant to the petition is advised to be forwarded to Lukman Sheriff Alias as the official spokesperson of G100. Please refer to the Facebook page of “G100 Lawyers” for the official position and development of G100;

(iv)lastly, G100 open heartedly invites members of any organization, including SukaGuam, to support the petition under their capacity as individual members of the Bar, but not as members of their respective organizations.

Signed by,
Lukman Sheriff Alias
(Official Spokesperson, G100)

Anonymous said...

Ladies & Gentlemen, Our Laws are backward and antiquated unlike Singapore's which it is alleged the Laws could be up-dated even in the courts eg.
1. The Companies Act 1965. Not revised since 1965 - 50 years
2. The Bankruptcy Act 1967. Not revised since 1967 - 48 years.
3. The Trustees Act 1949. Not revised since 1949 - 66 years.
It is a given that the Bar Council protects the general interests of all the Rakyat, not only the political ones. The Laws are vital and essential to the normal functions of the general economy and Society. Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia and the United Kingdom automatically discharge the bankrupts after 3 years. In Malaysia, the bankrupts are incarcerated in PERPETUITY.

My Say