Will the Malaysian Bar initiate legal action to compel the government to form the Independent Police Complaints and Misconducts Commission (IPCMC)?

This will be one of the hotly debated issues at the Bar's annual general meeting in Kuala Lumpur tomorrow.

Senior lawyer P Uthayakumar is keeping his fingers crossed that a majority of his peers would support his motion to call for a resolution for the Bar Council to institute a public interest litigation against the government for the establishment and implementation of the IPCMC.

"The implementation is an important step forward for the country as far as human rights are concerned. Lawyers should know the importance of an independent commission and they should support the motion," he told malaysiakini .

He said there was no reason for the government not to implement the IPCMC as Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had openly agreed to it.

"It's been a year since the Royal Police Commission made the recommendation for the IPCMC. Which is why in my motion, I have suggested that we give the government until May 31.

"If it is not implemented by then, the Bar must file a litigation to compel the government to do so. This is a matter of public interest," he stressed.

Diplomacy has its limits

Asked if wether the motion, should it be passed, would affect the Bar Council's ongoing discussions with the government to repeal section 46A of the Legal Profession Act, Uthayakumar said there was no nexus between the two.

"They are different issues. But at the same time, we can only practice diplomacy to a certain point. I mean we have been lobbying for the repeal of section 46A for the past 10 years but nothing has come out of it.

"Yes, we have a good relationship with the law ministers - who come and go - but in the end, the government makes a decision it sees fit because it has the power. So I don't think we should allow it to cloud the issues," he added.

Uthayakumar also stressed that his other motion, which aims to send a strong message to the attorney-general to expedite cases involving police abuse, was equally important.

"I am proposing a motion of no confidence against the AG for being extremely slow in prosecuting cases of criminal abuse of police powers," he said.

According to him, only 0.01 percent of these cases have been brought to court.

"We want to send a clear message to the AG to prosecute all cases of criminal abuse of police powers without fear or favour and by the same standards he would prosecute any other citizen."

Is it sustainable?

Looking forward for the debates on the two motions was lawyer Amer Hamzah Arshad, who is known for handling cases pertaining to human rights.

"His (Uthayakumar's) first motion has good intentions but it involves a lot of consideration. Members have to study it carefully, weigh the pros and cons.

"First, we have to determine whether an action to compel the government to do something is sustainable," he said.

If members can be convinced that such an action is sustainable, he said it would not be hard to convince them to support it.

As for the no-confidence motion against the AG, Amer wondered if this would achieve anything.

"I mean apart from a morale booster, can we achieve anything from a piece of paper that says we are not confident of the AG.

"I am not opposing the motion because I too am not impressed with the AG's track record in prosecuting such cases. But maybe we can think of other ways to get the AG to be more committed," he said.

Will there be enough lawyers?

However, debates on the issues, which are among 10 motions to be tabled at the meet tomorrow, can only proceed if the one-fifth quorum requirement was fulfilled - in adherence to a decision at the apex court last year.

This means that at least 2,400 lawyers have to attend the meeting before it can be flagged off. The issue of quorum has been a thorn in the legal fraternity as the quorum for other similar professional bodies such as doctors and accountants is far lower.

Bar Council president Yeoh Yang Poh has sent a personal plea to the 12,000 members urging them to attend the meet, which cost around RM80,000 to organise.

Amer believed that the quorum requirement will be fulfilled as lawyers were now more aware of the importance of the requirement.

"Well, it would not be easy but it's not impossible. It took a court case to tell us the importance of the requirement and I believe my fellow members will rise to the occasion."

The previous AGM recorded a thumping attendance of 3,027.