I wish to reply to R Razif's letter of Dec 5 ('CLP is for non-Malays' benefit'). I am amazed that a CLP candidate like him, as he claims, could make such remarkably way-off and illogical comments.

As a (former) practising lawyer with a UK law degree and English Bar qualifications, I would like to share some information and views on this subject with other lawyers and laypeople alike:

The CLP is a compulsory prerequisite qualification for all law graduates from overseas universities wishing to practise law in Malaysia and who have not also passed the English Bar examinations. It follows that all law graduates from Malaysian universities are exempt from having to sit for the CLP or any other overseas Bar exams - accordingly, these local law graduates are entitled to enter legal practice immediately after graduation.

As pointed out in the letter by JS Kanny ('A filter on non-Malays' entry into legal circle', Dec 6) the CLP is comprised of mainly non-Malays solely because of our university entry quota system. As a result, with the exception of the most brilliant of non-Malay students, the rest are forced to obtain their law degrees from overseas universities at prohibitive costs. Upon obtaining their overseas degrees, they have the gruelling CLP exams waiting in welcome for them whilst their counterparts from the local universities amble straight into legal practice after graduation.

It is also my view that the standard of teaching of law in local universities is woefully low and inept. I've lost count of the numbers of local law graduates whom I've encountered who weren't knowledgeable of basic legal principles or gave me blank stares whenever I mentioned common Latin legal terms or phrases.

To compound the problem, it seems that all and sundry are bestowed law degrees en masse without seemingly any failures each year - to support my point, has anyone yet met a student who flunked their law course in a local uni? In my view, this unchecked influx of substandard local law graduates into the local legal profession annually has been the largest contributory factor to its sharp decline in standards.

Just take a look at the qualifications of most of our senior lawyers and distinguished retired judges - their UK degrees and English Bar credentials are reflective of a bygone era when lawyers/judges were knowledgeable of their subject and mindful of the traditions of the Bar.

Any person who perceives any form of benefit from the CLP to non-Malays is either blindly prejudiced or just too plain thick to logicalise. If it appears that it's mainly the Chinese or Indians who have had their marks regraded or whatever, this is merely a reflection of the race composition of the CLP candidates and no more.

The writer says "let's not have a racial overtone when discussing this subject" even though he has nevertheless taken it upon himself to do just that in his letter! The truth of the matter is that the CLP with its 15-20 percent pass rate, whilst being a useful course in itself, also has the direct and sinister effect of drastically restricting the number of non-Malays entering the legal profession each year. Now, does this sound like the CLP is there "to cater for non-Malays to enter the legal profession"?