Law schools are dangerous. They are bad for health. Trees are denied life in abundance as yards of paper are wasted on learning snooty-sounding terms - 'opinio juris', 'ratio decidendi', 'pacta sunt servanda'. Countless cartridges of ink are used to develop far-out concepts which stretch the human mind, known today simply as 'equality', 'liberty' and 'justice'. Legal discourses have incrementally inserted content into these theories, and continue to do so.

Academics are frightening people. They seek to occupy the student's mind with as much as they can. And a mind is an extremely powerful matter. Battles for and of humanity are won and lost in the minds of people. Where seeds of idealism are planted, visions are born.

The result of too much thinking is dreadful. Much like manufacturing ammunition for war in factories, law schools turn students into legal terrorists. The cause? Ideological. To fight injustice, oppose tyranny, alleviate suffering.

These aims are oft-repeated. In practice, it usually is but more than empty sloganeering. A few days ago, the Court of Appeal broke new land when it refused to follow Eusoff Chin's Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit awful reasoning. What was motivation for this departure, somewhat enthused with an injection of radical proportions? How did it come about? And why? Useful hint when Gopal Sri Ram JCA was reported to have commented: "It is no exaggeration to say that Adorna has wreaked havoc in the law of real property. All you have to do is to read the national newspapers." Enough said here especially if an appeal is expected.

On the international scene, take human rights law as an example. What is known as the contemporary human rights movement started in 1945. A relatively young institution. Yet, rights values expressed pre-1945 in various cultural, religious, philosophical and political traditions have entrenched themselves by states' concurrence in no less than 30 key international human rights declarations and treaties today. Who could have imagined this when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was being drafted?

Legal systems specifically designed to promote and protect human rights have been established in Europe (European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1953), the Americas (American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man 1948 and American Convention on Human Rights 1969) and Africa (African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights 1981). Within the respective systems, various other regional human rights conventions are in existence. In total, more than five billion people are covered under the said regimes as a protective layer cushioning the UN mechanism.

Arab charter on human rights

The Arab states are moving quite quickly to close the chasm. In 1994, the Arab League approved the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which was subsequently revised and adopted in 2004. Encouragingly, the Charter affirms the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in Article 1 states:

"The present Charter seeks, within the context of the national identity of the Arab States and their sense of belonging to a common civilisation, to achieve the following aims:

1. To place human rights at the centre of the key national concerns of Arab States, making them lofty and fundamental ideals that shape the will of the individual in Arab States and enable him to improve his life in accordance with noble human values.

2. To teach the human person in the Arab States pride in his identity, loyalty to his country, attachment to his land, history and common interests and to instill in him a culture of human brotherhood, tolerance and openness towards others, in accordance with universal principles and values and with those proclaimed in international human rights instruments.

3. To prepare the new generations in Arab States for a free and responsible life in a civil society that is characterized by solidarity, founded on a balance between awareness of rights and respect for obligations, and governed by the values of equality, tolerance and moderation.

4. To entrench the principle that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated."

Who would have thought - Arab states - speaking about human rights in this way? As a monitoring mechanism, the Charter establishes an Arab Human Rights Committee. This is genuine progression. Earlier, a non-governmental initiative in 1999 which culminated in the Casablanca Declaration of the Arab Human Rights Movement had reaffirmed the universality and indivisibility of human rights. Much support and co-operation must be given to the Arab world in their endeavours, some might say, to catch up with the international human rights community.

Developments around the world provide further evidence of a programmatic acceptance of human rights norms on a scale like never before. No one should forget the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna which placed the 'human person' as the 'central subject of human rights and fundamental freedoms', augmenting principles of non-discrimination and inherent dignity; and at the same time categorically demolishing arguments of cultural and religious relativism in rights promotion and protection.

Usually, relativism is procured as the basis for rhetorical excuses by abusive states to seek cover for the commission of violations. But when more states are signing up to human rights instruments, surely something must be right. Out of 192 UN member states, 160 are already state parties to the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and 156 to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, both foundational treaties of the international rights society. But of course, and despite being elected to the Human Rights Council, Malaysia has been recalcitrant on both.

Much hope is placed on the Asean Charter which is being drafted now due to be presented for adoption at the end of the year. After the progressive recommendations of the Eminent Persons Group led by our Musa Hitam, civil society has pushed for the inclusion of rights promotion clauses and protection schemes for the ASEAN peoples. We do not deserve less than the peoples of Europe, the Americas, Africa and the Arab states. Just as Musa Hitam did with Suhakam, Asean may be another feat.

Extra-territorial application

International human rights law did not emanate solely from or because of lawyers or academics. It is a collective effort - not necessarily a planned one - conjoined with the work of rights complainants, activists, NGOs, labour organisations, religious movements, political parties, civil society and nation states. Nevertheless, the frequent complaint that human rights sounds 'too lawyer-ly' is a fair one, and because the project very much seeks certainty by infusing human rights into legal and constitutional frameworks.

As law schools persist in provoking and disturbing the minds and hearts of young, impressionable law students, we bear witness to incessant jurisprudence which may be applied in the lives of people around the world. Anecdotal evidence suggests the influence of legal scholarship forcing the South African government to establish a housing programme particularly for those in extreme poverty (Irene Grootboom), embarrassing the Ecuadorian government for stopping the provision of HIV-AIDS tri-therapy treatment (Edgar Carpio Castro Jofre Mendoza) and directing Israel to ensure equitable access and distribution of water to all living in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. When once it was thought that economic, social and cultural rights were non-justiciable, it has been proved otherwise.

No less, Rabinder Singh QC speaking at Oxford University on the occasion of the Joan Fitzpatrick Memorial lecture on July 6, 2007 discussed the extra-territorial application of international human rights treaties as a branch of emerging trends in human rights protection.

Initially, international law governed relations between states only. After World War II, rights were ordained to individuals against their own states. Come early 21st century, the individual would enforce rights against a foreign country in the latter's jurisdiction. Generally, states owe obligations only to those within their jurisdiction but the House of Lords in June 2007 changed that. In the context of the Iraq invasion, the Lords found that British troops could be accountable for the death of detainees held in their custody (R (Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence.

Relying on the rubric of the Human Rights Act 1998 domesticating the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1953, the court decided by a majority of 4 to 1 that the conduct of British soldiers in a Basra detention centre where Baha Mousa was beaten and died were subject to provisions of the European Convention.

To think of the number of students churned out yearly from education centres into the marketplace of legal practice, and who in time will educate and inspire others is intimidating. Yet, theoretical ideas of legal brawls in various settings like the courtrooms require effective translation of theory into practice. The gulf of disconnect however is sometimes too wide, a jump too far. Opportunities are lost or hidden. And frustration finds its own place. Devoid of a launch pad, the idealism and drive tapers. It moves to then kill the spirit and eat the soul.

Perhaps, the answer may be in greater practical training. Where law schools are hotbeds for ideology, continuing education post cannot be over-emphasised, particularly regarding hands-on aspects of practice. The country needs nothing less than well-trained lawyers. In this vein, a major revamp of the Malaysian Bar's internal professional development scheme (including how it is being taught and communicated to recipients) is on the cards and should be supported by all. A mid-term goal of rooting a structured programme throughout the country with greater participation from every member of the Bar should be implemented within the next two or three years.

But perhaps these views are too narrow. Properly managed and administered schools are all meant to ferment the zeal and refine the intellect - not just law schools. Can't argue with that, really. Conceivably, the abundant legislative restrictions on our tertiary students and educationists were meant to stifle. Not dissimilar to drifts of academics who are persecuted in their home countries, and fleeing to foreign lands only to flourish. Professor Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im did not return to Sudan as his views on reforming Islam within it consistent with human rights would have been unacceptable. Earlier, his teacher, Ustadh Mahmoud Mohamed Taha who led the reform movement and rallied against Islamisation whilst calling for the guarantee of civil liberties was accused of apostasy and executed by hanging in 1985. An-Na'im is now the Charles Howard Candler Professor of Law at Emory Law School in the US, continuing to provide much needed impetus for social change in the Muslim world through human rights scholarship.

Nat's arrest

Spare a thought too for Harvard idealist, Nathaniel Tan. His recent arrest and detention repeats justified criticisms of the Executive and police deficiencies in suitably handling issues of cyber-space. Why is detention necessary for an alleged documented, easily-traceable crime? Take a statement in the day and then continue on the next. But detention for 14 or four days? Little benefit in repeating the litany of violations post-arrest: not informed of the grounds of arrest allowing shifting of police justifications, invisibility of both detainee and venue of detention, and the usual 'wild goose chase' at the remand stage. When will the administration ever learn? How many more Royal Commissions do we need to tell us that which is so horribly wrong? Question the political will.

Nat describes himself as having faith in Malaysia. Not sure what he thinks now.

Query if young Nat has so quickly become a threat to the powers that be. But maybe he is seen as moving too fast, and too soon in political circles. It is a common dilemma. Get used to it! The comfort of the 'established' will always be less comfortable when the vanguards of the youth take the step up to the plate.

Nat recently proposed a series of innovative programmes to be co-hosted with the National Young Lawyers Committee. The focus was on political education. After discussions with Nat, the committee unfortunately decided that there were too many initiatives already happening this year, and decided to postpone it for consideration the next year. I felt bad. There is so much which can be done. Nat's enthusiasm and ethics however reminded me of the passion and energy much described in this short dissertation.

And so how do Malaysians go about changing the nation and improving the lives of fellow citizens? Necessary dissent is mandatory and human rights is indispensable, maybe.

Equally, the hazards of law schools continually promise generations of youth willing to push new ideas and sharpen humanity's hope for a freer and better world.