The Advocates and Solicitors' Disciplinary Board chairperson Abdul Hamid Said today clarified that the Bar Council holds no influence in the board, which is charged with the adjudication of complaints against lawyers.

Abdul Hamid, a retired High Court judge, said he and other members - consisting of lawyers of more than 15 years' standing - in the board has "enjoyed complete freedom" in discharging their duties when hearing and disposing complaints against members of the Malaysian Bar.

Responding to de facto law minister Dr Rais Yatim's statement yesterday over the backlog of complaints against lawyers, Abdul Hamid said the board wanted to dispel any impression created by Rais' statement which suggested that it is not an independent body.

Expressing

fears over the backlog of complaints, Rais ( photo ) also urged the Bar Council to "act transparently in handling disciplinary cases among lawyers" and had threatened to review the system.

Historical situation

Abdul Hamid also dismissed Rais' suggestion that the adjudication of complaints before the board are stagnant or delayed as the board convenes regularly for at least two days in a week.

He said the problems of backlogs had nothing to do with its efficiency but was caused by a "historical situation" owing to the failure in establishing the board immediately after the amendment was made to the Legal Profession Act 1976 which transfers the disciplining duties from the Bar to the board.

He, however, assured that the board has been successful in reducing all pending cases [see charts] and believed that disposal of cases will be faster once their current two-stage procedure is shortened.

"The board has recommended that the current two-stage procedure of an investigating tribunal followed by a disciplinary committee (to) be reduced to a single stage procedure involving only a disciplinary committee," he said.

The ex-judge also said that it would not simply dispose of cases at the expense of justice.

"The board wishes to reiterate that while the speedy disposal of cases are important, it is nevertheless equally important that the legal rights of lawyers facing disciplinary action should not be compromised by any quick procedure that denied them due process."

Incorrect and inaccurate

Meanwhile, Bar Council president Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari said the Bar was "extremely disappointed" with Rais over the statement which he described as "factually incorrect and inaccurate".

He said Rais has no right to criticise the Bar over the issue considering that the function of disciplining lawyers has been vested in the disciplinary board since 1992.

Kuthubul also ticked off Rais for stating that the Bar was ignoring issues of lawyers' discipline saying that it was factually misplaced as it views the matter very seriously.

"The Bar has not been hesitant to refer complaints against its members to the disciplinary board, even for minor breaches. To date, a total of 1,232 cases have been referred to the board relating to members who delayed their applications for practising certificates," he said.

The establishment of the board is provided under Section 6 of the Legal Profession Act (1976) which states that the board shall be headed by a judge or a retired judge appointed by the chief justice.

Its members include the president of the Bar Council and 15 senior lawyers also appointed by the chief justice. The members serve two terms only but that can be extended by the chief justice.

Any lawyer whom the board has found guilty of breaching any regulations provided in the LPA can be struck off from the rolls, suspended or fined. But they can appeal to the High Court.