The Bar Council office bearers of 2004/05 will meet tomorrow to decide a fresh date for the 59th annual general meeting (AGM) which was declared unlawful for lack of quorum. If only it were that simple.

The discussions are expected to be take a far more complex route, according to president Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari.

He told malaysiakini that an objection has been filed against him chairing the meeting because his tenure as the head of the Malaysian Bar expired last March.

"I was told that a member of the Bar has recorded an objection against me chairing the meeting on the basis that I can only hold office for two consecutive years as stated in Section 54(1) of the Legal Profession Act (LPA)," he said.

"If you read the High Court judgment (upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court) I still have the right to chair the meeting tomorrow to decide when to have the AGM convened. But I don't know how to overcome the complaint. Things could get complicated...."

He said he believed that the situation could be settled if the council can set a date as quickly as possible for the AGM and immediately obtain the one-fifth quorum as required.

If this fails, serious problems affecting the interests of lawyers will arise, including the issuance of the annual legal practising certificate which expires on Dec 31 each year.

"If that happens then maybe we have to look at the court's decision to see whether my re-appointment by the court would also allow me to perform other functions other than holding the AGM," he said.

"But let's focus on the meeting first. All these problems will not arise if we get the quorum quickly. We'll cross that bridge when we have to."

Practising certificate

The legal saga over the quorum requirement started when senior lawyer Edward Van Buerle filed a motion with the high court and successfully obtained a declaration that the meeting in March was "null and void".

The lawyer - among many senior members of the Bar who had walked out of the original meeting in protest - also obtained a declaration that the election of the Bar Council members and all resolutions and decisions passed were "unlawful".

The High Court's decision was then upheld by the Court of Appeal after dismissing an appeal by the Bar.

An attempt to bring the issue to the Federal Court failed when the court dismissed an application for leave to appeal.

A second issue arising from this situation involves the annual practising certificates. Former Bar Council secretary Ambiga Sreenevasan, when contacted, said the 12,000 members can only receive their certificates if a president is elected at the 59th AGM.

"It happens that we are now at the time of the year where we start renewing the sijil annual which is why we want to hold the meeting as soon as possible in the interest of our members," she said.

A senior lawyer who declined to be named pointed out that members should attend the AGM if they want to have their certificates issued.

"They all know that without the certificate, they can't practise. Like it or not, they have to come. If they don't...well, they have no one to blame but themselves," said the lawyer who has been practising since 1994.

Recent problem

Former Bar Council president RR Chelvarajah said this should not be used as a 'stick' to force lawyers to attend the meeting.

"It's like threatening a person's right to livelihood. I don't think this is the way (to do it)," he said.

In the past, he said, the Bar had no problem in fulfilling the quorum requirement because there were not many members.

"The LPA was amended in 1978. To my recollection, between 1979 and 1986 we always had a quorum at first go. The annual reports showed that, between 1987 and 1993, we also had quorum at first instance," he noted.

The issue surfaced in 1994 where the Bar had to adjourn the meeting but subsequently had quorum.

"Later from 1995 to 1999 we have had a quorum at first go. The problem resurfaced in 2000, then in 2002, and from 2004. More importantly, we had less than 3,000 members in 1990, but today we have nearly 13,000. The quorum is getting more and more outrageous due to increased number of members."

He foresees that the problem will be an annual matter for the Malaysian Bar and stressed that the government must address the matter by amending the law.

"Once you have very large quorum requirement, we may find a situation where quorum is unachievable. The running of the Bar will come to a standstill. This will involve issuance of sijil annual and the president's various other duties like sitting on the disciplinary board," he added.

"We can see that the problem will have far-reaching consequences. So the government must do something...not for the lawyers but for the public who need 'legal' qualified lawyers to represent them. The government must act now."