The Bar Council was asked by Justice Dr. R.K. Nathan to show proof that Minister in the Prime Minister Department Dr. Rais Yatim had made allegations against the Chief Justice.

Nathan said that unless the Bar Council could show substantiation that Rais actually made statements to that effect, he is partial to giving an injunction to stop the council's EGM set for tomorrow.

"The Bar Council (Executive Committee) members say the meeting was to be held to discuss allegations made by Rais. Has he in fact made any allegation?" asked Nathan.

Nathan said the newspaper report ( New Straits Times , May 31) tendered as evidence by the defendant to support the decision to call a meeting constitutes hearsay evidence which is inadmissible.

He cited the Lorraine Osman case as the authority for saying that newspaper clippings cannot form the basis of truth.

Defence counsel Mohamad Ariff Yusoff said that the purpose of the EGM is not to establish the truth, or otherwise, of the allegations but to call for a mechanism to investigate the allegations.

"The resolution of the Bar Council is clearly based on the report (in the NST ) and other reports," he added.

Nathan asked, "Which other reports?"

Ariff answered the compilation of different press reports as submitted as evidence.

Nathan asked, "Can you confirm the truth of the press reports?"

The defence counsel then asked for a 10-minute adjournment to consult his clients on the matter.

When the court resumed, Ariff replied, "I have the necessary instruction on whether the Bar Council wrote to the Chief Justice or to Rais Yatim (to verify the truth of the reports). The answer is no."

Second defence counsel, Ambiga Sreenevasan, later contended that it is not for the defendant to prove that the meeting should be held, but the onus is on the plaintiff to show why the meeting should not be held.

In reply to the plaintiff's counsel D.P. Vijandran's contention that the Bar Council was not concerned with the truth of the allegations, Ambiga said the council is very interested in the truth.

"The Bar's stand is that we want fact-finding ascertainment of the truth to be done by a responsible body by way of a tribunal or royal commission," said Ambiga.

"We want to take the allegations out of the public domain and put them in proper hands," she added.

She further argued that these are issues which the plaintiff can come to the meeting and debate upon.

Justice Nathan is expected to give his decision on whether to grant an interim injunction at about 3.30pm.