The government may amend some of the draft provisions of the Academy of Law Bill 2002 after considering the points raised by the Bar Council in a memorandum submitted on June 14, said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Dr Rais Yatim.

Rais, the de facto law minister, said the possibility of making amendments to the Bill, the tabling of which was deferred to September, will be discussed with the attorney-general first.

"I have read the memorandum and I do find some of their views to be reasonable. There is a likelihood that the government will opt to amend some of the draft provisions.

"It is no longer a question of policy. Technically, the AG is the right person to handle this matter. I have to do my homework first before meeting him soon," he said when contacted yesterday.

Rais is expected to meet AG Abdul Gani Patail next Tuesday.

As an example, he conceded that the Bar Council's request for the chairperson's post to be on a rotation basis was justified.

"As for whether the membership should be compulsory, it is a policy matter and up to the government."

On this, the Bar felt that such proposed membership terms are "all the more objectionable" when members are subjected to discriminatory powers and without any voice in the running or accountability of the academy's administration.

On the Bar Council's request for a dialogue, Rais said there was no immediate need for that.

"They are going to say the same things which are in the memorandum anyway. Furthermore, I will be meeting lawyers from Sarawak and Sabah," he added.

No democratic features

The 12-page memorandum states that the Bill encroaches upon the Malaysian Bar's right to regulate its own affairs and interferes in its discipline and conduct, thus undermining its independence.

It also points out the absence of democratic features which would ensure accountability, such as the lack of provisions for electing the senate, the academy's governing body, and for conducting general meetings.

Stressing that neither the academy nor the senate was self-governing, the Bar stated in the memorandum their concern that the minister is the one who ultimately wielded the power, albeit with the senate's advice.

The absence of a right to any hearing or representation, or to any appeal was also raised.

Citing two clauses in the proposed Bill implying executive interference, the Bar questioned the rationale behind the minister's prerogative to appoint two non-legally qualified persons to sit in the senate.

It also questioned the propriety of establishing a hierarchy in the form of class discrimination by dividing members into categories.

Judges as members

On the question of conflict of interest, the Bar argued against automatically making all judges members of the academy.

"Consequently, if there should arise any issue before the courts involving decisions or acts of the senate or the academy, all of the judges in the higher courts will be in an embarrassing position when called upon to adjudicate."

In a nutshell, the Bar wants the government not to impose compulsory membership, not seek to control of the conduct of the legal profession, allow self-governance and regulation, provide election of senate members, ensure accountability and provide for general meetings.

A significant portion of the memorandum also covered the differences and similarities between the Bill and the Singapore Academy of Law Act 1988.