A lawyer who seeking a court order directing the Bar Council to proceed with its recent elections which were declared null and void has every right to do so as he was a voter in that election, the Kuala Lumpur High Court heard today.

Counsel Tommy Thomas, representing the plaintiff Foo Ton Hin, told Justice KP Gengadharan that Foo had a 'locus standi' to sue the Bar Council over the elections as he also had an interest in knowing whether his choice of candidates were elected.

"Foo has the right and interest to know whether his desired choice of candidate had become a part of the leadership in the Bar Council," said Thomas.

He argued that Foo's locus standi could be established under the Legal Profession Act, Section 44C, which counsel said outlined a member's statutory right to file a case if he was a voter in a Bar Council elections.

He added Foo's vote will indirectly help to determine the top leadership of Bar Council because the voted candidates will choose a president from among themselves.

Hence, added Thomas, Foo's vote was critical towards determining who will be voted into the Bar Council committee and become its future president.

On Wednesday, Zainur Zakaria, counsel for one of the defendants Yaacob Hussain Merican, had argued that Foo had no locus standi in asking for the elections to proceed and that his suit against the Bar Council should be dismissed.

"The plaintiff has no locus standi because he is not one of the candidates who stood for the said elections, but was just an ordinary member of the Malaysian Bar," Zainur had said.

Foo, of TH Foo and Associates, was one of the 3,370 voters who voted last month to elect 12 council members for the Bar Council's new term. However, the scrutineers discovered forged ballot papers, leading to police reports being lodged and the elections being declared null and void by them.

A 'busybody'

Foo is seeking a declaration that they had acted beyond the scope of the Legal Profession Act when they declared the elections void on Dec 1. He wants the court to instruct the scrutineers to verify the authenticity of the ballots cast by matching each against its counterfoil and excluding any that is not authentic.

Thereafter, he wants the defendants to declare the names of the persons elected according to Section 50 (5) of the LPA within seven days of the court order. In the alternative, Foo wants the court to order three partners of an international accounting firm or other persons to be appointed as scrutineers at the expense of the Bar Council.

It should then take all necessary steps to complete the elections and announce the names of those elected.

Apart from the Bar Council and the three election scrutineers who are Yaacob, Inderjit Singh, and S. Radhakrishnan, the other defendants in the case are Boniface Lobo, Dr Rafie Mohd Shafie, Hendon Haji Mohamed and Cecil Rajendra all of whom were candidates in the elections.

Countering Zainur's argument that Foo was merely a 'busybody', Thomas said the term might as well then be applied to all the 3,370 voters in the elections and the 12,000 Bar Council members.

Gengadharan fixed Jan 26 to continue hearing arguments.