Bar Council chairperson Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari today questioned the timing of the election breach allegation raised against him by a veteran lawyer last week.

Manjeet Singh Dhillon had accused Kuthubul of violating the Legal Profession Act (LPA) by personally collecting the postal votes during the council's last elections.

He also raised a no-confidence motion against the chairperson at the council's monthly meeting on Saturday but this was rejected by its members.

"The practice of receiving ballot papers delivered by hand has been in place since the current structure of the elections came into effect in 1976.

"Manjeet, as a former office bearer, is well aware of this. To my knowledge, neither he nor any other lawyer has made an issue out of it prior to this," said Kuthubul when contacted.

Asked why the lawyer chose to raise the matter now, he replied: "I don't know, you should ask Manjeet."

Manjeet, who was the Bar Council chief in the 80s, had contested in the last polls but failed to retain a seat in the council. Twelve members were elected but the veteran lawyer ranked 14.

No violation

Although Kuthubul admitted to collecting the postal votes, he disagreed that this violated the LPA.

"It is correct that I had hand-delivered to the Bar Council secretariat two sealed ballots given to me by two members for onward transmission to the council. This, according to Manjeet, flouts Section 50 of the LPA... I disagree," he said.

According to Kuthubul, Section 50 does not stipulate that the ballots could only be returned to the council by post, as interpreted by Manjeet.

"The provision does not say that. Section 50 only speaks of the ballots being returned to and received by the Bar Council. It does not say that ballots must be returned by post or received by post," he added.

He said if Manjeet's contention was justified, it would lead to the "absurd result" of rejecting many ballot papers which were delivered by hand to the council either via law firm staff or otherwise.

Of the 32 members present at Saturday's meeting, 23 voted against the no-confidence motion, six for it and three abstained.

Asked to comment on this, Kuthubul said: "Majority of the members are supportive of me, I won the last elections with a two-third majority."

On Manjeet's plan to take the issue to court, Kuthubul said nobody could stop the former from doing that.

48-hour deadline

Contacted later, Manjeet said he had sent a letter of notice to the Bar Council yesterday and if they fail to response within 48 hours, he would take legal action next week.

"My lawyer has sent the letter of notice to Bar Council yesterday in seeking a judicial interpretation as to what Section 50 entails and whether in the total context of the facts set out in my affidavit the election is vitiated," he said.

The veteran lawyer, who said the council had "arbitrarily interpreted the law" had vowed to pursue legal action before the council's annual general meeting scheduled for March 20.

Manjeet was also the secretary of the council during the 1988 judiciary crisis and was cited for contempt over his role in the open confrontation between the Bar and the judiciary.

The Bar Council elections is conducted entirely through postal ballots. The 36-member council represents the 11,000-strong Malaysian Bar.