INFO Johore Bar - December 2014 by INFO Johore Bar

DECEMBER 2014 BULLETIN OF THE JOHORE BAR

LEAD ARTICLE

FOR MEMBERS ONLY Private Circulation

ANNUS HORRIBILIS

This piece has nothing to do with Sodom and or Gomorrah, cities mentioned in the Hebrew Bible or, any sodomy action against whomsoever, anal sex or, even the rustic ikan bilis. The intriguing words “annus horribilis” have in fact beenfashionable since 1985 (according to the Oxford Dictionary). They were however made famous or infamous (choice of one) by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II (“the Queen”) of England after a year of family misfortunes and calamities. The Lord Mayor of London hosted a glittering lavish Royal banquet at the London Guildhall on the 24th Nov 1992 to felicitate and celebrate the Queen’s 40th year on the Throne of England. The coffers of England are ladden with a vast variety of diamonds rubies and gem stones probably relieved from the East India Company. The Kohinoor is said to be from the Maharajah of Punjab Maharajah Ranjeet Singh. There is an apocryphal story about Hyderabad that punctuates most conversations about the city’s history: the last ruling Nizam, Mir Osman Ali Khan, used the Jacob Diamond - the seventh largest in the world, today valued at over US$100 million - as a paperweight on his writing table. After all, the Nizam of what was then a Princely State was known to be as eccentric as he was wealthy. It is not unknown that a Malaysian Royalty had a Rolls Royce as an escort vehicle. In February 1937, the Time magazine featured Khan on its cover as the richest man in the world, so wrote Charukesi Ramadurai. Incidently the Islamic Charminar in the Centre of Hyderabad has in it The Bhagalakshmi Hindu Temple built by the Nizam for his Hindu wife. Con’t page 4

- S. Balarajah

In This Issue … 1. Annus Horribilis - S. Balarajah

1&4-9

2. Message from the Chairman - R. Jayabalan

2-3

3. Keep It Color Blind - Roger Tan

10 - 12

4. Without Fear Or Favour - Allen Yu

13 - 14

5. Book Review 15 - 21 (1) The Conversion Conundrum – S. Balarajah (2) Three Books Launched Simultaneously Authored by Esteemed Judge Hamid Sultan – KLRCA (3) Constitutional Dynamics – Frontline 6. An Introduction to RPGT Act 1976 (Part 1) - Yang Pei Keng

22 - 26

7. A Wee Potpourri of Poetry (A Lawyer’s Digression!) – S. Balarajah

27 - 34

8. End the Conveyancing Monopoly - Datuk Zaid Ibrahim - The Star

35 - 36

9. Leave Conveyancing to Lawyer’s - Chang Kim Loong – The Star

37 - 39

10. Elevation Ceremony & Dinner In Honour of YA Tuan Teo Say Eng

40 - 51

11. Hyde Park Corner - S. Balarajah

52 - 55

12. Annual Profile of Members of the Bar - Bar Council

56 - 58

13. Bar Postal Elections 2014 - S. Balarajah

59 - 61

14. The Office Pearl - Allen Yu

62 - 64

15. The Psychotherapist - N. Jagatheeson

65 - 67

16. Blast from the Past

68 - 70

17. An Introduction to RPGT Act 1976 (Part 2) - Yang Pei Keng

71 - 74

18. Johore Bar Activities & Pictures

75 - 131

19. Three (3) Obits by S. Balarajah (a) The Late Lau Koh Kong (b) The Late Loh Song Chuan (c) The Late Ravindran a/l G.S Paramasivan (d) Allahyarhamah Norisah binti Abu Aman

132 - 134

20. New Admissions to the Bar And Annoucements!

135

21. Johore Bar Statistics at 31 Dec 2014 2014) INFO JOHORE BAR – (As DECEMBER

136

JOHORE BAR COMMITTEE 2014/2015

Message from the Chairman… Dear members,

Chairman R. Jayabalan

Committee Members Puan Shahareen Begum Binti Abdul Subhan Hardip Singh Mathews George Kuna Nadasen C. Sankaran Ms. Santhi a/p Balachandran Ms. Gun Huei Shin Fadhil Ihsan Bin Mohamad Hassan Ng Kai Choy Andrew Wong Fook Hin (Co-opted)

Representative to the Bar Council S. Gunasegaran

Hon. Secretary Puan Nik Raihan Binti Nik Ja’afar

INFO JOHORE BAR EDITORIAL Chairperson – Mathews George Deputy – Kuna Nadasen S. Balarajah Chandra Sekran Norman Fernandez Ms. Thilagavathy Rama Loo

Yang Pei Keng Pn. Shahareen Begum Goh Tiong Sin Cik Aimi Syarizad

INFO JOHORE BAR welcomes articles be they legal non legal or extra-legal. We do not want the INFO Johore Bar to be a dull government gazette-like publication. Please therefore put pen to paper and let us have articles, stories, views and reviews for publication. The editorial sub-committee’s decision on materials submitted is final and matters that infringe on sedition, defamation inflammation or provocation will most definitely be excluded and might find their way back. The views of the writers of articles etc are not reflective of the views of the Bar Committee neither does the Bar endorse or adopt their views. Editorial Committee Info Johore Bar 2014/2015

JOHORE BAR COMMITTEE No. 5, Jalan Tun Abdul Razak Susur 1/1 80000 Johor Bahru, Johor Tel : 07-276 3888 Fax: 07-276 1188 Email: secretariat@johorebar.org.my Website: www.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

R. Jayabalan

A new year has dawned upon us and with that the current Johore Bar Committee’s term of office is also coming to an end. Perhaps it is opportune now to look back at the past year and also see what is in store for the new year.

The year 2014 saw an overhaul of the High Court bench in Johor. Three High Court Judges and one Judicial Commissioner were transferred out, two newly appointed Judicial Commissioners and a High Court Judge came in and two resident Judicial Commissioners were elevated. A new Sessions Judge who is also the new Courts Director also came to Johor Bahru. We are still short of one High Court judge and this could cause some difficulty in case management for the time being. We hope that the judiciary will send a new judge soon to complete the High Court bench here. The implementation of e-filing was tough at the beginning. There were many complications and confusion. However as time went on members have come to accept that e-filing is indeed the way forward for legal practice. E-filing has brought with it many advantages, convenience and time saving. The starting costs for migration to e-filing was considered by some members as prohibitive and has deterred its wider implementation. The courts and the system provider have responded with new filing mechanism and more attractive pricing. This new structure has been effective and more lawyers have taken to e-filing. Members who are still resisting e-filing and continue to rely on the service bureau should consider to move into e-filing soon. This because the costs of service bureau has increased tremendously and is likely to increase more in future in order to force more members to move into e-filing. The Civil Sessions Court has undergone restructuring. Accident cases will now be heard at Sessions 2 and Sessions 1 will no longer hear accident cases. We are aware of some members’ concern with this impending change and had immediately brought this to the courts’ attention. One result of this was the re-affirmation that Chief Registrar’s Practice Direction No. 2 of 2013 that has set out the workflow and timeline for mediation and hearing of accident cases must be complied with, Con’t page 3

not only by members, but also by the courts. Members are therefore advised to be familiar with the Practice Direction and to bring this to the court’s attention when necessary. The next big move in the country that would affect members especially partners and sole proprietors would be the implementation of GST come 1.4.2015. Many changes in respect of documentation, billing and collection would have to be carried out at the firm in order to be GST compliant. Members are advised to be prepared and to collect as much information as possible in respect of this. The Committee have conducted several seminars and briefing sessions to educate members on GST. Whereas response has been very good, there are still a large number of members especially in the smaller towns who have still not familiarized themselves with the new system and could be caught wanting once the system starts. I would suggest these members to take steps to be ready immediately and a good start would be to read the GST guidelines for lawyers that is available at the Royal Customs webpage. Members are however advised to regularly cross-refer the guidelines with their tax consultants or accountants in order to be certain. The 43rd Bench & Bar vs Police Games took place on 21st - 28th November 2014 and this time around was organized by the Police. Unfortunately the Bench & Bar contingent still could not break the Police’s dominance over the Games despite the strong will and determination. It has been about 25 years since the Bench & Bar won the Games and the disappointment is set to continue for another year. An unfortunate incident during this event was the use of the wrong logo with offensive words instead of the correct Bar Council or Johore Bar logo on the Games souvenir that was handed out by the Police. The matter was immediately taken up with the Police, explanation was sought and we had put on record our anger on this. The Police clarified that the mistake was due to the souvenir printing company downloading the wrong logo from internet and conceded that there was an oversight on their part in failing to recognize this mistake earlier. The printing company and the Police had expressed their regret and extended their written apology to the Committee over this incident. A continuing difficulty that was faced by the Committee is the lack of wider participation from amongst the members for Bar programs – be it social, sporting or educational events. Whilst generally the level of participation from amongst the younger members have improved, we feel that considering that the Johore Bar is the third largest Bar in the country with 1796 members, we should have better participation at our programs. This is a problem that unfortunately we have to continue to explore and address. Of late the courts have brought to the Committee’s attention that there are too many instances of lawyers coming to court late, standing down matters indefinitely, not properly attired, lack of court decorum, not ready to proceed with matters and poor preparation particularly in criminal matters. Whilst this definitely does not reflect the Bar in general and very small in numbers, it is nevertheless a serious issue that has gained the court’s attention and has to be dealt with. Members are therefore advised to avoid such instances and to be ready, willing and able to conduct matters in the best manner and in accordance with the practice and etiquette rules. Members are advised to take note that in as much as we expect the courts to carry out their function accordingly it behoves upon us as well to carry out our function in the same manner. Members are also reminded that our AGM will take place on the morning of 14.2.2015 at the usual venue the JOTIC Auditorium. Please attend the AGM and exercise your right as members of the Johore Bar. The Annual Dinner & Dance will take place in the same evening. The Social Sub-committee has put a lot of effort and time in ensuring a pleasant and enjoyable evening for members. Do look out for the circular in respect of the dinner and give us your support by attending with your family and friends. Finally, I wish to thank the Editorial Committee for working hard in ensuring the successful publication of this issue. Thank you. R. JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Now the Lord Mayor in his most important toast of the evening to the Queen said all the appropriate things and proposed a hearty toast to Her Majesty. The Queen in her halting response to the toast said, inter-alia, in the Queen’s English, of course as follows: “1992 is not a year which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure. In the words of my more sympathetic correspondents it has turned out to be an annus horribilis.” Her Majesty who was in 1972 bestowed the title Darjah Utama Seri Mahkota Negeri (DMN) by the then Yang DiPertuan Agong is enveloped in regal opulence wealth name and fame but was at that point of time reduced to the lowest ebb of distress. Likewise, for most people the world over, 2014 was not a terribly good year. So “annus horribilis” would be the most appropriate words to be used even for us Malaysians. It was a year of unavoidable calamities misery and misfortunes and gave us all as a people grave distress and alarm. Our politics, the politicians, the economy, the executive, the Legislature, the Judiciary and the Director of Public Prosecutions have all taken an awful lot of beatings rightly or not so rightly. Missing and crashing aeroplanes, missing boats, intrusions, on the border, religious and racial bigotry, massive flooding affecting many States resulting in huge losses and damage and crimes of all types have raised their ugly head and seem to ride high. Accusations of selective prosecutions and persecutions, questionable judgments, partial justice, and all sorts of questionable conduct have been raised. The majesty of law has also been questioned and even ridiculed. The public seem to throw their arms up to high heavens and say in distress “is there no relief for us – the poor children of the nation?” But no answer descends. Like the Roman Emperor Nero was said to have been playing the fiddle whilst Rome burned was some hero playing the field whilst nature unleashed its wrath? Why do people and leaders conduct themselves in an obnoxious manner? Are we not mindful of the ancient teachings that once our lives in this sublunary abode ends by effluxion of time, or whatever cause, we must give an account of our conduct throughout our lives to that one great God; who shall reward or punish as we have obeyed or disregarded His divine precepts, commands, and teachings? The American Bar Association in an additional note once wrote about the necessity of the legal profession to periodically pause and even ponder its origins and directions; where it came from and where it is headed to. Likewise, it is proper, indeed it may be said to be most essential, for the people as a nation to periodically pause, ponder and assess as to where it is heading as a nation and out of what tradition it has come from. A caveat. Cardinal duc de Richelieu is said to have expressed some caution: “If you give me six lines Written by the most honest man, I will find Something in them To hang him.” But the Great Eastern Scholar Confucius viewed positively: “Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows lack of courage.” Alan Moore is reputed to have proffered these words: “People shouldn’t be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Richelieu

Alan Moore

Even before the Magna Carta (1215) power has always been with the people. As a nation we must try and correct our course lest we fall into eternal condemnation. But this is said not just to win an arguments. For as President Barrack Obama said: “Most people who serve in Washington have been trained either as lawyers or as political operatives - professions that tend to place a premium on winning arguments rather than solving problems.”

Barrack Obama

It has been reported that the Health Ministry of Malaysia has found that one in every 100 Malaysians suffer from Schizophrenia which is a classified mental illness. It hurts both the ill and those around them. It is said that Schizophrenia sufferers experience emotional thought and behavioral disturbance, causing them to believe and behave as if they are in their own world. Pills alone cannot cure this condition. Pills may arrest its escalation and keep it under control but cure seems only be remotely possible, if at all. Is this why people ulter most obnoxious comments and descent to gutter politics? Outright racial and religious abuse by so many of the protected species may call for pills and may be prayers and even prison to arrest further escalation. Not being accosted or pulled up may cause them to be oblivious and seem to clothe some wanton ones with a shield of immunity which will cause them to move further with boldness to further exaggerate verbal vitriolic. The vast majority of the populace has a right to question as to why one who uses unparliamentary adjectives in mere arguing in angry vituperation is hounded whereas one who threatens to burn books that will cause huge religious rebellion is judged by the prosecuting authority to have a valid reason and defence to have uttered those questionable words. A little legal learning teaches us that as long as there is a prima facie case, it is incumbent on the Director of Prosecutions to prosecute and it is for the accused person to lay his defence before the Court and for the judge to try the case based on the laws and facts. It is a time honored truth that one cannot be Investigator, Prosecutor, Defence counsel and Judge all rolled into one. Why is there a need to refashion established rules and procedures? It appears that some high ranking officers of the crown may have appeared to ignore Orders of Court (prima facie contempt?) and Appeals to higher tribunals seem to be filed only in selected cases and these are alleged to be bordering on selective prosecutions. A retired Chief Justice was said to be subjected to some form of investigation for some possible offences but nothing seems to have come of it after many months. A pro-government politician is said to have no intention to commit sedition and so no charges are preferred. Some seem to read the mind of man. In English law we were first taught the even the devil does not know the mind of man! This is was when we first imbibed the law on mens rea and actus rea. Academics, opposition politicians and the common man have been pulled up for mere angry vituperations others go scut-free for their uncouth action and words. Not just fair or equitable. These are noted and penned not to cause any conflict but to try and understand and uphold the purity of prosecutions and in the hope that the streams of justice will flow as it should. A very well respected retired Appellate Court Judge the Hon Dato K. C Vohrah who was in his time on the Bench of the Superior Courts of Malaysia a truly remarkable member of the Judicial Community in a letter to The Star (23.10.2014) wrote: “The A-G under Article 145(2) has the power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Dato’ K C Vohrah

The power is an awesome power which has to be exercised bona fide and with great professionalism and care. And any perception that the A-G when exercising such powers, is biased, selective or acts under ministerial pressure or pressure from any group will bring disrepute to the office of the A-G and cause grave misgivings as to the fair administration of the legal system. And when mistrust arises in regard to the exercise of such powers it would be to the discredit of the Government.”

Some may be tempted to use the phrase “casting pearls” etc but whatever was writ by the learned Judge seems to have been ignored with a show of arrogance of power and position. It seems that we must propagate an evolution. A change. Nobody desires a revolution. The Christian Bibles confiscated by certain authorities have thankfully been returned. It was claimed that the books were mutilated with rubber stamps, which is again said to be an arrogant act of bullying. Conversions of minors by a single parent brings about untold misery to the family. The jurisdictional imbroglio vis-à-vis the Common Law Courts and the Shariah Courts do not appear to have been resolved. Empanelling an Appellate Court of 3 Judges or 5 Judges of the same faith, race, language and religion is itself claimed by the man-on-the street to be a breach of natural justice. We have to be fair and appear to be fair to one and all. There must be an appearance of independence. Of impartiality. Of fairness. Perceptions are important in the dispensation of law and justice. The man on the Bench should not broadcast and proclaim his own religious and racial preference and bias. This proclamation per se taints and colours and the seat of justice. Justice has always been said to be blind. As long ago as the 17th of Dec 1957 the English Lord High Chancellor Lord Kilmuir wrote: “I was very much struck by the high regard felt everywhere for the administration of justice. I am certain that, whatever constitutional changes may occur or have occurred, the interests of freedom and democracy are best served if in all countries the people have this great respect for the law, and if the Courts deserve that respect. I have no hesitation in expressing my confidence that the best legal traditions of the Common Law are so well established in the new Federation of Malaya and in Singapore that we need have no misgivings on this score.” - 1958 volxxiv MLJ pg 1 Sadly one is moved to pause and ponder if this is true today. Are Judges and justice held in high estimation amongst the common folk? Politicians, servants, the Government and all manner of peoples seem to be issuing statements as regards judicial proceedings without let. The law of contempt is swept under the carpet without any fear. Judicial Officers also seem to be making statements uncannily. The maxim was at one time be that the Judiciary should be seen and Tunku Abdul Rahman not heard. Carrying placards and issuing statements on Court proceedings has not been our culture before. In 1965 Tunku Abdul Rahman then Rt. Hon. Prime Minister made a remark on a defamation case (1965 (3) MLJ 142) in which his Minister of Education, one Rahman Talib lost. The Prime Minister made some remarks on the case and the presiding Judge was the late Justice Tom Hepworth (father-in-law of Tawfik Tun Ismail). The P.M. was threatened with contempt proceedings but he being a lawyer he apologized speedily and the opposition leader D.R. Seenivasagam did not proceed further. The Education Minister was removed from office and posted to Egypt. D.R. Seenivasagam

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Our streams of justice must remain clear and unobstructed. It grieves one to see the noble streams of justice being polluted and all sorts of allegations hurled. It has been said that the welfare of the people is the supreme law - ‘solus populi supreme lex’ Therefore the faith of the peoples in the Courts of the land should be the paramount consideration and should be maintained at any costs. With respect, no religion can be said to be more superior to another religion. Religion is personal to the holder and each adherent treasures his own. “Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any man should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered.” – Abraham Lincoln In his Second Inaugural. Abraham Lincoln And Rumi Jelaluddin Balkhi the Sufi wrote : “I searched for God among the Christians and on the cross but therein found him not. I went into the ancient temples of idolatry; no trace of him was there. I entered the mountain cave of Hira (where the archangel Gabriel appeared to the Prophet) and then went as far as Qandhar but God found I not, neither in low nor in high places. With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Caucasus and found there only anqa’s habitation. There I directed my search to the Ka’bah, the resort of old and young; God was not there either. Turning to philosophy, I inquired about Him from Ibn Sina but found Him not within his range. I fared then to the scene of the prophet’s experience of a great divine manifestation only a ‘two-bow lengths distance from him’ but God was not there, even in that exalted court. Finally I looked into my own heart and there I saw Him: He was nowhere else.” Let’s see what Rumi says of various paths to God. ONLY BREATH – by Rumi Jelaluddin Balkhi Not Christian or Jew or Muslim, not Hindu, Buddhist, sufi, or zen. Not any religion or cultural system. I am not from the East or the West, not out of the ocean or up from the ground, not natural or ethereal, not composed of elements at all. I do not exist, am not an entity in this world or the next, did not descend from Adam and Eve or any origin story. My place is placeless, a trace of the traceless. Neither body or soul. I belong to the beloved, have seen the two worlds as one and that one call to and know, first, last, outer, inner, only that breath breathing human being.

Rumi Jelaluddin Balkhi

All manner of peoples must be enlightened and edified by various religious teachings and tenets lest little a knowledge becomes a dangerous thing, per Alexander Pope. A common thread running in all religions and philosophies seem so alike. Don’t know if any religion teaches man to be bad. All religions teach goodness, truth and justice. We call our chosen God by numerous affectionate adulations. Let us examine and be enlightened by some teachings.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

MANKIND’S GOLDEN RULES (Condensed from “The World’s Great Scriptures 1964 by Lewis Browne) Through-out the scriptures of seven of the world’s leading religions runs a single theme, expressed in astonishingly similar form:

This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you - Mahabharata 5/1517

Hurt not others in ways that yourself would find hurtful. - Udanavarga 5/18

Is there one maxim which ought to be acted upon throughout one’s whole life? Surely it is the maxim of loving kindness: Do not unto others what you would not have them do to you. - Analects 15/23

Regard your neighbors’ gain as your own gain, and your neighbors loss as your own loss. - T’ai-Shang Kan-Ying P’ien

What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. - Talmud Shabbat 31A

All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets. - Matthew 7/12

No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. - Sunan

This is a beautiful piece of work: “At the Meuzzin’s call for prayer The kneeling faithful thronged the square Amid a monastery’s weeds, An old Franciscan told his beads, While on Pushkara’s lofty height

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

A dark priest chanted Brahma’s might, While to the synagogue there came A Jew to praise Jehovah’s Name. The One Great God looked down and smiled And counted each His loving child For Turk and Brahmin, Monk and Jew Had reached Him through the Gods they knew.” Jonathan Swift (English Satirist – 1667-1745) noted: “We have enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.”

Jonathan Swift

The end result is that we ought to tear down walls that cause any form of division just as the Berlin Wall was torn down 25 years ago to unify the nation. No amount of politics or putrid pontification is going to help if we do not arrest deterioration of race relations and restart adhesion. History of other ancient nations and the peoples ought not to be doctored or watered down or even changed. And the political pundits must slam the brakes of hatred and division lest festered wounds cause us to be a Nation of misery. We must be on the side of righteousness as President Abraham Lincoln said:

“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; My greatest concern is to be on God’s side, For God is always right.”

Ancient teachings behoves us to revere the great creator God with all that awe and reverence. These are said to be plainly due from the creature to the creator. We must learn how to support our neighbour and render him every kind office and relieve him of his several afflictions and necessities if at all possible. Justice has to be the guide of all our actions. There must be corrective engineering of the minds to achieve this. The last year has been a rather horrendous wretched and evil year - all 52 weeks have made the populace sad angry upset and devastated. Some even question as to why will a good God shower us with immense misery and suffering of untold magnitude? Let us lift our hands to that great God and pray the ensuing year 2015 would be a year of calm, peace, prosperity and full of happiness for all the peoples of the world. Lets pray for brotherly love in an unbrotherly world. Let there be drops of goodness in a sea of insanity. And as a great man once said “lets stand together as brothers or perish like fools.” He had also said “our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matters.” (Martin Luther King). Martin Luther King

S. Balarajah 31st Dec 2014 Johore Bar

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

KEEP IT COLOUR BLIND by Roger Tan

Our judges, regardless of their race and religion, must always be mindful that they have taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution not for some but for all Malaysians. I HAVE wanted to write this for some time – my tribute to the late Sultan Azlan Shah who passed away on May 28, 2014. Not so much because he had been reading my column, but rather on two occasions which I had the honour of meeting him, he had encouraged me to keep on writing.

Roger Tan

I was also troubled that when he passed away, he had not been accorded the appropriate recognition by leaders of our legal profession of his contribution to the administration of justice in this country. This could be due to some differences with the Sultan’s decision not to call for fresh state elections when Pakatan Rakyat lost the majority control of the Perak state assembly in February, 2009. I had at that time written extensively that the Sultan’s decision was constitutionally correct. Interestingly, the Federal Court’s judgment which subsequently endorsed the correctness of his royal decision is now being relied upon by his then most vociferous and sometimes insolent critics in Pakatan Rakyat to justify replacement of the embattled Selangor Mentri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim without the need for a state assembly sitting or the dissolution of the assembly. Sultan Azlan belonged to the generation of great Malaysian jurists including the likes of Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim and Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader. He was, after all, the youngest ever appointed High Court Judge and Lord President. Not many knew that whenever the Malaysian Bar stood up for the independence of the judiciary, he was always there with and for us. I still remember the keynote address he gave at the 14th Malaysian Law Conference on October 29, 2007; of which I was the organising chairman.

The late Tan Sri Dato’ Dr Eusoffe Abdoolcader

The conference was held one month after 2,000 or so lawyers walked for justice from the Palace of Justice to the Prime Minister’s office to hand over a memorandum asking the government to set up a royal commission of inquiry to investigate the V.K. Lingam video tape which implicated the then chief justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim. At that time, the Malaysian Bar was aware that Tun Fairuz was said to have asked for an extension of an additional six months, allowed under the Federal Constitution, when he turned 66 on Nov 1, 2007 – the mandatory retirement age for judges. Needless to say, it was an open knowledge then that the Bar was dead against this. When my committee and I had an audience with Sultan Azlan inviting him to deliver the keynote address, this was made known to him. In an obvious act of retaliation, I received a letter from the judiciary a few days before the conference that judges would not be attending the conference due to “unforeseen circumstances”. A High Court judge from Ipoh who was supposed to deliver his paper had to pull out in the last minute. Nevertheless, I am grateful that the then Industrial Court President, Datuk Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid sent most of the Industrial Court chairmen to participate in the conference. As a result, only a handful of senior judges turned up at the opening of the conference and also the dinner later in the night hosted by then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. One senior judge who was noticeably present was the then President of Court of Appeal, Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad who subsequently became the chief justice. He appeared to be a keen supporter of the Bar at a time when the relationship between the Bar and the judiciary could be said to have reached its lowest ebb.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

On my part, I accorded him every courtesy and opportunity being the most senior judge present to be seated close to Sultan Azlan and the Prime Minister during the photography sessions and at the dinner. He did not appear to me to be upset with the Bar Council and I was appreciative that he had turned up with the full knowledge, of course, that he might just succeed Tun Fairuz if the latter did not get the extension. Hence, his recent criticisms of the Bar Council came rather as a surprise to me. In his keynote address, Sultan Azlan broke tradition and expressed his sadness over the state of our judiciary then. He also called for judicial reforms. For the sake of posterity, the following important excerpts of his speech ought to be reproduced in which he said: “In matters concerning the judiciary, it is the public perception of the judiciary that ultimately matters. A judiciary loses its value and service to the community if there is no public confidence in its decision-making. “Sadly, I must acknowledge that there has been some disquiet about our judiciary over the past few years and in the more recent past. In 2004, I had stated that it grieved me, having been a member of the judiciary, whenever I heard allegations against the judiciary and the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary. “I am driven nostalgically to look back to a time when our judiciary was the pride of the region, and our neighbours spoke admiringly of our legal system. We were then second to none and the judgments of our courts were quoted confidently in other common law jurisdictions. As Tun Suffian, a former Lord President of the then Federal Court, said of the local judges who took over from the expatriate judges after Merdeka that the transformation was without ‘any reduction in standards’. “There is no reason why judges with the assured security of tenure they enjoy under the Constitution should not discharge their duties impartially, confidently and competently. “Countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong, who have a similar legal system and who share similar laws, and whose judges and lawyers are trained as ours, are ranked in these surveys as amongst the best in the world (Hong Kong is placed first and Singapore ranks as fourth in the world). “There is one further important point that I feel compelled to say. This deals with a judge’s quality in decisionmaking. We in Malaysia live in a multi-cultural and multi-religious society. Our founding fathers accommodated this diversity into our Constitution that is reflected in the social contract, and saw this diversity as strength. “Judges in Malaysia must be ever mindful that they are appointed judges for all Malaysians. They must be sensitive to the feelings of all parties, irrespective of race, religion or creed, and be careful not to bring a predisposed mind to an issue before them that is capable of being misconstrued by the watching public or segments of them. “I am reminded of the proud accolade of the late Tun Suffian in his Braddel Memorial Lecture in 1982, when speaking of the Malaysian judiciary to a Singapore audience he said: ‘In a multi-racial and multi religious society like yours and mine, while we judges cannot help being Malay or Chinese or Indian; or being Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu or whatever, we strive not to be too identified with any particular race or religion – so that nobody reading our judgment with our name deleted could with confidence identify our race or religion, and so that the various communities, especially minority communities, are assured that we will not allow their rights to be trampled underfoot.”

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

No doubt, he received a standing ovation for his landmark speech. After the conference, the palace called up the Bar Council Secretariat for more information regarding leaders of the Bar, and he was kind enough to confer one of them with a Datukship. Indeed, our judges, especially those at the apex court, regardless of their race and religion, must always be mindful that they have taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution not for some but for all Malaysians. If their decisions especially on sensitive racial and religious issues are predictable because of their race and religion, then they have failed miserably to measure up to the standards set by Sultan Azlan and Tun Suffian. If that is so, then I am afraid issue of race has become the sine qua non for appointing a judge in this country. In this respect, I have written that judicial diversity and meritocracy should go hand in hand, and a judiciary that does not reflect society’s diversity will ultimately lose the confidence of that society. (See Judicial diversity creates confidence, The Sunday Star, Nov 13, 2011) Singapore just celebrated her 49th national day and they have already overtaken us in this regard by leaps and bounds as both their Attorney-General and Chief Justice are Singaporean Indians – Vijaya Kumar Rajah, 57, and Sundaresh Menon, 52.

V. K Rajah

But sadly in Malaysia, it is an unthinkable thing for any qualified non-Malay even of exceptional capability to be appointed as the Attorney-General or the Chief Justice. Of course, words are easy compared to putting them into practice. But it remains my fervent hope that the above wise words of Sultan Azlan will be a constant reminder to all our judges whenever they dispense justice in our beloved land. Sundaresh Menon

Similarly, our judges who sit at the apex court should never abdicate from their powerful position as the guardians of our Constitution whenever there is any infringement of constitutional rights in any segment of our society. They, as Abdoolcader once pointed out, must not just stand there and fold their arms and do nothing; otherwise they might as well “hang their heads in sorrow and perhaps even in mortification in not being able to at least entertain for consideration on its merits any legitimate complaint of a public grievance or alleged unconstitutional conduct.” The Sunday Star Sunday,17 August 2014

“ First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. They they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Martin Niemoeller

WITHOUT FEAR OR FAVOUR By Allen Yu

As lawyers we are expected to act without fear or favour for our clients, protecting their interest and rights to the best of our ability. Lawyers who are also politicians experienced threats the most, as do lawyers who took up controversial matters.

Allen Yu

But for the rest of us, the less brave normal lawyers, we too are faced with threats from time to time, enough to scare some of us to give up practice. I think I am able to count the number of threats with my one hand i.e. 5 times I was threatened. The first time I was threatened with bodily harm was when I sealed a tenant’s house back in the 1980’s. He came with a friend looking for me at my in law’s house. He shouted for me to come out and when I did, he threatened to smash up my office the next day. He did not do so. It turned out his friend was the son of one of my clients and my client stopped the son from helping this tenant. The tenant’s friend later became my friend and a client and as karma would have it, the friend broke the tenant’s jaw in later years. I was not happy when one of my clients told me that he had scared the daylights of a lawyer who registered a caveat on his property. He laughed as he told me in detail the story. I told him off, nicely that the lawyer was only doing his job and that he should not have done that. Seeing that I was not happy, he stopped laughing. On another occasion I lost a case in a debt collection matter. My client who was a SOB and a relative, was rude to me. He did not want to appeal, yet still refused to pay the judgment debt. A few months later his office was faced with execution proceedings whilst he was doing business. He issued a postdated cheque and threw it at the lawyer. The lawyer threw it back at his face. That was a second humiliation. His brother visited me later and complained about this lawyer’s action and that my ex client wanted to get some people to beat up this lawyer up. I was furious and told him that I would be the first witness if his brother proceeded to do so. He did not. I faced animosity from a tenant’s son when I sued the tenant. I was with 2 colleagues Mohd Ashri and the late Azlinda (his father’s lawyer) at a warong having our breakfast after the court case. The tenant’s son came and started to insult and cursed me in the open. You see his father has a P.I.S. and to him it was an audacity to sue his father who was “a somebody”. His fingers came nearer and nearer to my face. I controlled myself but told myself, “touch me and you’ll get it”. Ashri as if reading my thoughts kept whispering to me, “steady Allen, steady Allen”. In the end he went off without any further incident. Over the years I have heard of other lawyers experiences. Some had scratches on their cars. One found her car broken into and the road tax removed. Another found his hanging signboard in the dustbin. Lady lawyers told me that some clients were crude and used the Hokkien “F” word on them. One lawyer who did litigation work had some problems with a client who was a gangster. He found his car burnt early one morning and a coffin sent to his office. He was lucky. Another lawyer was shot in the stomach in his house. He survived and left the profession soon thereafter. He was a conveyancing lawyer.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

A senior lawyer was attacked by a parang wielding assailant outside his house. The assailant did not intent to kill him but to send him a message. It was rumoured that the matter was concerning a foreclosure matter. And another senior lawyer was assaulted by his client resulting in him losing partial hearing from one of his ears. I remembered an angry Respondent husband telling me not to act for his wife because their marital problems were nobodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s business but theirs. He threaten me without specifying what would happened if I proceed. I proceeded and nothing happened. In another divorce matter the husband came with two friends and threw my letter at my face demanding to know what was written. I had advice his wife not to let him have access to the young child until the outcome of the hearing. He had previously used the child to force the wife to return home. He was a wife beater. I kept my cool but gave a stern look at his two friends. They caught on and cowed away. To my surprise, the wife reconciled with the husband. The threat of violence from unhappy clients and unhappy opponents is inevitable whether one is doing civil or criminal litigation or conveyancing. Its part and parcel of being a lawyer and it can change a young and confident lawyer to a cynical and grumpy one, that is to say if he remains in the profession.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

BOOK REVIEW THE CONVERSION CONUNDRUM - By K. SILADASS - MY CASE SOLUTION SDN BHD - BILINGUAL (Bahasa translation by Muhammad Taufiq Bin Abdul Jalil) K. Siladass is not an unknown name amongst the members of the Johor Bar. As a senior member of the Johor Bar he served a number of years as a member of the Johor Bar Committee and has been and continues to be an active member of the Bar.

K Siladass

He is a prolific writer of books and articles. In fact he penned his first book even before his admission to the Bar! As Hon. Secretary of the the Johore Bar Committee from 1972 I was invited by the writer to launch the book “Quantum in Accident Cases” which I did in 1974. Since that maiden venture Dass has written many more books articles and researches papers pertaining to the niceties of the laws. His latest offering is “The Conversion Conundrum.” In the book the author embarks on a scholarly survey of the conundrum of conversion to the Islamic faith. Conundrum may well be an odd choice of word but it plainly means a riddle or anything that puzzles. And of course this aspect of the lawyer puzzles law litigants and the Courts. It is a little book of 74 pages in the English Language and 73 pages in the Malay Language translated by Muhammad Taufiq Bin Abdul Jalil. Like the instant coffee, you get 2 in 1. The book is timely as the contentious issue has made headlines and has cause some havoc in the lifes of some families in the recent past. There may be a sparsity of judicial prouncements on this aspect of the law and so the learned writer depends on the few available cases and the statutes relating to the issue. The book is not a heavy-weight nor is it in any way weighty containing insipid jurisdictional and purely legal appendages. It is in plain language and thus makes it appealing to both the profession and to the man-on-the street. Books such as this may not adorn that the “best seller” list. Indeed it is not garnered for such market. The market for such works is a rather niche market.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The author must be commended for a work that will not hugely enrich him but may be rewarding in the sphere of spreading knowledge and in the exposition of the laws. This book surveys the statutory and case laws and the impact it will have on the several populace and the nation as a whole. Cases of conversion by choice or force can be a bombshell and a cauldron of fire as religion is always an emotive matter. K. Siladass in his work “The Conversation Conundrum” has made an important contribution to an important legal issue and debate. He deserves all praise and support in writing a book on this most difficult subject. He does not chew his words and is open and bold in his survey. He seems to suggest that the system has to be revolutionized fairly but this has to be done after a careful study and research and with care and caution. The book will be a useful addition to the libraries to all those interested in the religious aspiration of the people of the country and why some convert and some get converted to spite the other spouse or her family. Are conversions because of faith or out of fury and scorn? Does a Court have a right to look into a man’s mind when it is said that even a devil will not know what is on one’s mind. S. Balarajah 1.11.2014 Johore Bar

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Three Books Launched Simultaneously Authored by Esteemed Judge Hamid Sultan ©Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (Used by permission)

From left: Christopher Leong, The Right Honourable Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (CJM), The Honourable Justice Datuk Dr Haji Hamid Sultan bin Abu Backer, Tun Zaki bin Tun Azmi, Prof. Datuk Sundra Rajoo Kuala Lumpur, 18 October — Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (KLRCA) together with Lincoln’s Inn Alumni Association Malaysia and Bar Council Malaysia recently organised a book launch authored by the Honourable Justice Datuk Dr. Haji Hamid Sultan bin Abu Backer from the Court of Appeal Malaysia. This unprecedented launch saw three of the judge’s books titled, ‘Janab’s Key to Criminal Procedure 3rd Edition’, ‘Janab’s Key to Law of Evidence 4th Edition’ and ‘Janab’s Key to Islamic Banking with Medjelle (Ottoman Code)’, unveiled simultaneously. The event was well received with the presence The Right Honourable Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin, the Chief Judge of Malaya along with a bench of judges from the Malaysian judiciary. Also in attendance were a host of legal practitioners. The books were launched by YABhg Tun Zaki bin Tun Azmi who is the President of the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn Alumni, Malaysia and former Chief Justice of Malaysia; Mr Christopher Leong, President of the Malaysian bar; and Professor Datuk Sundra Rajoo, Director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (KLRCA). “KLRCA has always been a keen advocate towards the development of the nation’s legal scene. Being an Alternative Dispute Resolution Centre, we make it our mission to source for industry related seminars, conferences and reading materials that have the capacity to enhance our existing knowledge and comprehension on this subject matter,” said Professor Datuk Sundra Rajoo, in his opening address. Hon. Justice Datuk Dr. Haji Hamid Sultan has also authored numerous books prior to these releases. Amongst them being Janab’s Key to Civil Procedure in Malaysia and Singapore, the 5th edition of which was published in 2012. The book launch was then followed by a seminar titled “Is Knowledge in Adjectival Law the Key to Successful Trial and Appellate Advocacy?”. The distinguished panelists included Hon. Justice Dato’ Mohamad Ariff bin Mohd. Yusof, Hon. Justice Dato’ Mah Weng Kwai, Hon. Justice Dato’ Umi Kalthum binti Abdul Majid, Hon. Justice Tuan Vernon Ong Lam Kiat and Hon. Justice Dr. Prasad Sandosham Abraham. The session was moderated by Hon. Justice Dato’ Nallini Patmanathan. The morning’s proceedings were concluded by a winding-up speech on Procedural Law by YBhg Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, Vice President of the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn Alumni Association, Malaysia. About Janab’s Key to Criminal Procedure (3rd Edition), Janab’s Key to Law Evidence (4th Edition) and Janab’s Key to Islamic Banking with Medjelle (Ottoman Code)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

A) Janab’s Key to Criminal Procedure (3rd Edition) The 3rd edition of Janab’s Key to Criminal Procedure is a comprehensive guide to the law and practice of Criminal Procedure in Malaysia. The Criminal Procedure Code has seen some major amendments in the recent years, in particular it introduces new concept such as pre-trial conference, plea bargain, case management protocols, admissions, witness statement, inclusive of in roads to hearsay rule in criminal cases which is going to have significant impact on criminal practice in Malaysia. This book consists of detailed discussion of the principle and practice of Criminal Procedure with detailed commentary to the criminal Procedure Code. Special emphasis is given to jurisdiction of criminal courts, arrests, seizable and nonseizable offence, seizable case and non-seizable case, bail, bailable offences, unbailable offences, bond surety and security, complaint, information and first information reports, inquiry, investigation and trial, sanction and consent, summons and warrant, summary trial, trial in High Court, sentence, alibi, expert report, impeachment proceedings, appeals to High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court.) B) Janab’s Key to Law of Evidence (4th Edition) Janab’s key to the law of evidence is an excellent introduction and comprehensive guide for all who are engaged in the study, practice and administration of the law. The author surveys the concept of Law of Evidence and highlights of the substantive and procedural principles with extensive reference to the common law. The position of Law of Evidence to a large extent is comprehensively covered and salient differences of approach with the law in India are also highlighted. The author has included the latest amendments to the Law of Evidence in Malaysia and has taken into account the latest judicial pronouncements in this area of the law. The book is arranged to reflect and cove the syllabus of the law faculties and departments of the local institutions of higher education. In addition legal practitioners and the judiciary will find this book of benefit for quick references. C) Janab’s Key to Islamic Banking annexed with Medjelle (Civil Code of Ottoman Code Calliphate) In the last four or five decades, Islamic trading concepts have been used as financing instrument to provide banking facilities. It started in Mit Ghamr, Egypt by Ahmad EI Najjar in 1963. The concept was expanded in countries like Malaysia and the Middle East and followed by many other countries inclusive of United Kingdom. The jurisprudence relating to Islamic Trading concepts have been documented in the Medjelle. The importance of Medjelle in the study, practice and administration of Islamic Banking has been addressed in Chapter One of this book. The author who is a prolific writer has revised this popular works for bringing to light the importance of Medjelle. He has written a number of books on adjectival law as well as commercial and civil law and his first book on Islamic Banking was published in 2003. This 3rd Edition has valuable features in that the Medjelle (Ottoman Code or Civil Law) which had codified Islamic law as well as Islamic commercial transaction in extensor has been annexed. It is well known that Medjelle has been widely referred to by various authors in the past as an authoritative text to explain Islamic law and its concepts. The study of Islamic Banking will be complete if students and jurists have not exposed themselves to Medjelle. Extracted from The Malaysian Bar website

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

An Introduction to Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Part 1] By Yang Pei-Keng - 22 Sept 2014

Yang Pei Keng

[Note: This is an introduction to the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 (the RPGT Act) meant for beginners. The original version of this article entitled “Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 - An Introduction” was published in the Info Johore Bar in the year 2000, some 14 years ago. Since then, numerous amendments have been made to the RPGT Act. The article has been duly revised and re-written. Due attention is given to the latest amendments, which took effect from this year, i.e. 1 January 2014. Some of the earlier amendments remain validle today. Some others are referred to in this article for purposes of comparison, so that the reader will have a correct perspective of this piece of legislation. ]

What is “RPGT’?

‘RPGT’ is the acronym for the “Real Property Gains Tax “. It is a tax on disposal of landed property introduced by “the RPGT Act”. It came into force on 7 November 1975. It only applies to disposals relating to landed property, but not any other property. Though known as the ‘1976 RPGT Act’, it was implemented earlier in the previous year 1975. The reason for this “discrepancy” is that the real property gains tax was imposed immediately on the tabling of the Budget in Parliament in November 1975. But the RPGT Act was not passed until the subsequent year (1976).

What is the difference between RPGT and CKHT?

There is no difference between the two terms. It refers to the real property gains tax. RPGT is the acronym for “Real Property Gains Tax” in English, whereas CKHT is the acronym for Cukai Keuntungan Harta Tanah” in Bahasa. They refer to one and the same thing i.e. the real property gains tax. The disposer is the seller (or the transferor), while the acquirer is the buyer (or the transferee). RPGT is payable for every disposal of landed property, but there are certain exemptions from RPGT.

What are the types of disposal of landed property which are exempt from RPGT?

No real property gains tax is payable in the following cases: (1) A gift between husband and wife, parent and child, grandparent and child, and vice versa: para 12 Schedule 2. (Note: But a gift between brother and sister, or between uncle and nephew is not exempt from RPGT.) (2) When the estate of a deceased person is transmitted (transferred) to the personal representative (i.e. the executor or administrator): para 3(a). (3)

When a person dies and his property is passed on to his beneficiary [para 19 and 3(a) Schedule 2].

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

(4) Any transfer of landed property from a person [or his family member] to a company controlled by him in consideration of shares in that company (controlled company): para 34 Schedule 2. (5) Where a person creates a trust, and transfers the property to the trust: para 28. Nominees are in the same position: para 28. (6)

Compulsory acquisition by the Government

[Note: The term “disposal” of any property covers not only any sale, but it also covers any gift. Gifts from relatives are not exempt from RPGT. But any transfer for love and affection between specific close relatives (e.g. husband and wife, parent and child, grandparent and grandchild, and vice versa) are exempt from RPGT.

Do you know the brief history of the RPGT?

The history of the RPGT can be best understood by tracing its origins. The predecessor of the RPGT Act is the Land Speculation Tax Act 1974 [“the LST Act”] . It came into force on 6 December 1973. The LST Act was designed to impose a tax on land speculation in sales and purchases of houses or land. It was meant for curbing speculative activities in land deals for quick profits during the property boom. The Act was supposed to be a temporary measure, to be repealed once speculation in land was under effective control. But, after it had been in force for about two years, the government found it too lucrative a source of income. When it was repealed on 6 November 1975, it was immediately replaced by a new piece of legislation of a similar nature - the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976, which came into force the following day i.e. 7 September 1975. This replacement legislation imposes a tax with a newly-coined name: “real property gains tax” instead of the term “speculation tax”. The RPGT Act was implemented just one day after the repeal of the LST Act. Since its commencement in 1976, the RPGT Act has been made a permanent feature in our statute books until today. Under the Act, the real property gains tax is payable on any gain from the sale or transfer of real property (except for the categories of disposal exempt from RPGT. ).

Does the RPGT Act apply to the transfer of company shares?

Yes. Now it applies to the transfer of certain company shares. Originally, the Act only covered the transfers of landed property i.e. residential houses, shophouses, condominiums, apartments, flats [whether with or without titles], agricultural land, mining land, etc. The transfer of company shares was not covered by the Act and was therefore not subject to RPGT. The transfer of company shares does not involve any registration of transfer of land in the Land Registry or land office. It does not attract RPGT. Subsequently, Parliament introduced an amendment to the RPGT Act to cover any sale or transfer of shares of a certain category of companies, known as the “real property companies”. A “real property company” must own substantial tangible assets in the form of land. At least 75% of the market value of its tangible assets must be land.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

6 What were the rates of RPGT payable by Malaysian citizens in the early years, i.e. after 17 October 1997? The rates of RPGT payable by a MALAYSIAN CITIZEN say in 2000 (i.e. on of after 17 October 1997) were as follows:

Rates of RPGT payable by a MALAYSIAN CITIZEN in 2000 Disposal by

year 1

year 2

year 3

year 4

year 5 year 6…….

citizen

30%

20%

15%

(See Schedule 5, Sections 4 and 7(4), of the RPGT Act.) Note: (1) For the first 2 years, the rate of tax was 30%. (2) The rate of tax was generally reduced by 10% every year, except for year 4. (3) In year 4, the rate of tax was reduced by 5% only (from 20% to 15%). This Schedule of Rates of RPGT had been in use for many years since 1997. Subsequently, in the early 2000s, because of the serious economic recession, total exemption of RPGT was allowed for about 2 years. The RPGT was re-introduced in 2010, when the economy picked up. Since then, there have been changes in the rates almost every year.

The latest rates of tax [w.e.f 1.1.2014]

Now (in the year 2014) the government feels that the property market has picked up. To curb the steep rise in property prices, the rates of RPGT have been sharply revised upwards this year. The new schedule of rates introduced by the 2014 Budget are as follows:

Schedule of Rates of RPGT effective from 1 January 2014 Disposal by

year 1

citizen

30%

company

30%

year 2

year 3

year 4

30%

20%

30%

20%

year 5

year 6

15% 0% 15%

non-citizen 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 5% Note: A non-citizen (e.g. a Singaporean) has to pay a flat rate of 30% RPGT for any disposal of property within the first 5 years of its purchase. A non-citizen has to pay a minimum of 5% RPGT, no matter how long he has kept the property after the purchase.

8. In the early years, say in 2000 (i.e. after 17 October 1997), what were the rates of RPGT payable by a foreign or local company ? [Note: These rates of tax are not applicable now (in 2014) The illustration is meant for comparison only, not to be applied to any current disposal.]

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

In the early years, say in the year 2000, a company (whether local or foreign), paid the same rates of RPGT. There was no distinction between a foreign company and a local company. Foreign companies and local companies were treated alike. Perhaps this was to encourage foreign investments. The following is the schedule of rates of RPGT payable by a company (whether local or foreign) in 2000.

Rates of RPGT payable by a company previously in 2000 Disposal by company

year 1

year 2

year 3

year 4

30%

20%

15%

year 5 ……. 5%

Note: (1) The rates of tax were slightly different from those of a non- citizen. (2) A company had to pay at least 5% RPGT upon the disposal of any property after 4 years of the purchase, i.e. from the 5th year onwards. It does not matter how long the company had kept the property.

What are the new rates of RPGT payable by a company w.e.f. 1-1-2014?

Now, in the year 2014, the position of a company (whether foreign or local) is similar to that in 2000 [i.e.14 years ago]. That is, it has to pay at least 5% RPGT no matter how long it has kept the property after the purchase. But the difference is that the rates of RPGT payable by a company are now are higher than those payable in 2000. See the chart below:

Rates of RPGT payable by a company w.e.f. 1-1-2014 Disposal by company

year 1

year 2

year 3

year 4

30%

20%

year 5 year 6… 15%

Note: With effect from 2014, the RPGT rates for year 3, year 4 and year 5 are much higher than those found in the year 2000. See the comparison below: 2014 2000 -

10.

30%, 20%, 15% respectively. 20%, 15%, 5% respectively.

What are the deductible items for RPGT computation?

The following are some of the deductible items in the computation of the RPGT payable: 1. Legal fees and stamp duty 2. Broker’s commission 3. Cost of advertising to find a buyer or a seller 4. Fees for valuation report, accountant’s fees, etc. Note: Monthly instalments paid towards a bank loan are not a deductible item in the computation of RPGT, but it is deductible for income tax purposes

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

11.

Is production of documentary evidence for deductible items required?

Yes, deductible items will only be allowed upon production of documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the Inland Revenue Board. For example, receipts for renovations and improvements are to be produced. Invoices are not acceptable. In the case of a broker’s commission, a receipt for such payment must be produced, disclosing the broker’s name, identity card number and address.

12.

RPGT exemption of 10% of the gain (minimum RM10,000) is allowed for any seller.

In addition to the deductible items (e.g. legal fees, broker’s commission, etc.), every seller of a landed property is entitled to a minimum exemption of RM10,000 RPGT or 10% of the gain (whichever is higher). In other words, if you sell a house and has made a gain of RM10,000 only, you need not pay any RPGT: para 9, Schedule 4. It is to be noted that this minimum RM10,000 RPGT exemption is allowed after taking into account all deductible items (e.g. broker’s commission, legal fees, stamp duty, registration fee etc.) You will find that if your gain is RM100,000 or below, the RPGT exemption will be RM10,000 (i.e. RM100,000 x 10% = RM10,000). No gains tax is payable by you. Therefore, so long as your gain does not exceed RM100,000, you are entitled to a minimum RPGT exemption of RM10,000.

13. RPGT exemption of “10% of the gain” can be much higher than the minimum RM10,000 if your gain is above RM100,000. If your gain is above RM100,000, you will be entitled to a higher RPGT exemption than the minimum of RM10,000. For example, if your gain is RM200,000, the 10% RPGT exemption will be M20,000 (i.e. RM200,000 x 10% = RM20,000). If your net gain is RM1 million, then the 10% RPGT exemption will be RM100,000 (i.e. RM1,000,000 x 10% = RM100,000). That is much higher than the minimum RPGT exemption of RM10,000.

14. An illustration showing the computation of the RPGT Example: Sale of a house for RM1.5 million by a Malaysian in the 4th year (20% RPGT) in 2014. Disposal price Less deductible items: Acquisition price Legal fees, stamp duty etc. broker’s commission advertising fee valuer’s report

Gain

RM1,500,000 400,000 19,000 20,000 500 500 440,000 -----------------------------1,060,000

Exemption (10% of the gain) = 1,060,000 x 10% = RM106,000 [Note: The RPGT exemption of RM106,000 is much higher than the minimum exemption of RM10,000.] (to be continued)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

A WEE POTPOURRI OF POETRY (A Lawyer’s digression!) - S. Balarajah

S. Balarajah

In “A Third Treasury of Kahlil Gibran”, it is alleged that poets are “unhappy people, for, no matter how high their spirits reach, they will still be enclosed in an envelope of tears.” Poetry is said to be “a sacred incarnation of a smile. Poetry is a sigh that dries the tears. Poetry is a spirit who dwells in the soul, whose nourishment is the heart, whose wine is affection. Poetry that comes not in this form is a false Messiah.”

And that great Sufi poet philosopher and artist/painter penned these words on tears: “The tears of young men are the overflow of full hearts. But the tears of old men are the residue of age dropping upon their cheeks, the remains of life in weakened bodies. Tears in the eyes of young men resemble drops of dew upon a rose, but the tears of old men resemble yellow autumn leaves, blown and scattered by the wind as the winter of life approaches.”

Kahlil Gibran

Are poems always penned by sad and unhappy souls? Is poetry a vain and egoistic work of an idle emotional insane mind? Is it mere mental masturbation? Does poetry disclose the truth? Is a poet a coward who dare not pen his thoughts in prose? Gibran ventured to say that “poetry is not an opinion expressed. It is a song that arises from a bleeding wound or a smiling mouth.” Sad again He says poetry is the result of spontaneous thoughts and feelings. But Frederick Nietzche a 19th Century philosopher and father of existentialism calls the poet a liar. Nietzche being an atheist, claimed that all Gods are prevarications of poets. Is it Voltaire (1768) who said that if there is no God we have to invent Him? But Gibran believed Frederick Nietzche that poets are angels, messengers of God. He believed that poets are gifted souls in whose breasts God has implanted the soothing balm of consolation gives a torch to illumine the paths men to life liberty and beauty of all created things. Poets gentle souls who illumine our unlit paths and lead us from darkness to light from subjugation to liberation. Poets are not always sentimental old fools or lovelorn lassies. They may be gentle souls in an ocean of emotion or may even be warriors crying out a battle-cry. They may be just care-givers who put pen to paper to express their fears and sorrows in being unable to mitigate or give relief to the suffering patients in their care and so through the tears of frustration poetry rolls down. The helpless, distraught and dismayed turn to poetry. They use poetry as the soothing balm for relief. Poetry is a balm that calms. A number of modern poems are selected which expresses the emotional tugs, hugs, pulls and pains of the man in the poet or is it the poet in the man?

(a) “Would You Permit Me?” – by Nizar Qabbani and (b) “A Land of Ripples” - by Ibohal Kshetrimayum Nizar Kabani, indeed a special man, and a Syrian par excellence. He was Syria’s Ambassador to the UK and other countries, and a brilliant man and a poet par excellence. Many of his poetry dealt with the pleasures of the flesh, food, drink, etc and he had a tremendous following within the Arab speaking masses. But, many were not impressed enough to join his admirers given his allegedly wanton ways. His poetic style combines simplicity and elegance in exploring themes of love, feminism, religion, and Arab nationalism. He become one of the most revered contemporary poets in the Arab world, he began writing poetry when he was 16 years old. At his own expense, Qabbani published his first book of poems, entitled “The Brunette Told Me”, while he was a law student at the University of Damascus in 1944. Over the course of a half-century,

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Qabbani wrote 34 other books of poetry. A rather visionary and revolutionary man one must say. Let’s enjoy this rather elective poetry.

(a) “Would You Permit Me?” – by Nizar Qabbani In a country where thinkers are assassinated, and writers are considered infidels and books are burnt, in societies that refuse the other, and force silence on mouths and thoughts forbidden, and to question is a sin, I must beg your pardon, would you permit me? Would you permit me to bring up my children as I want, and not to dictate on me your whims and orders? Would you permit me to teach my children that the religion is first to God, and not for religious leaders or scholars or people? Would you permit me to teach my little one that religion is about good manners, good behaviour, good conduct, honesty and truthfulness, before I teach her with which foot to enter the bathroom or with which hand she should eat? Would you permit me to teach my daughter that God is about love, and she can dialogue with Him and ask Him anything she wants, far away from the teachings of anyone? Would you permit me not to mention the torture of the grave to my children, who do not know about death yet? Would you permit me to teach my daughter the tenets of the religion and its culture and manners, before I force on her the ‘Hijab’ (the veil)? Would you permit me to tell my young son that hurting people and degrading them because of their nationality, colour or religion, is considered a big sin by God?

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Would you permit me to tell my daughter to revising her homework and paying attention to her learning is considered by God as more useful and important than learning by heart Ayahs from the Quran without knowing their meaning? Would you permit me to teach my son that following the footsteps of the Honourable Prophet begins with his honesty, loyalty and truthfulness, before his beard or how short his thobe (long shirt/ dress) is? Would you permit me to tell my daughter that her Christian friend is not an infidel, and ask her not to cry fearing her friend will go to Hell? Would you permit me to argue, that God did not authorize anyone on earth after the Prophet to speak in his name nor did he vest any powers in anyone to issue ‘deeds of forgiveness’ to people? Would you permit me to say, that God has forbidden killing the human spirit and who kills wrongly a human being is as if he killed all human kind, and no Moslem has the right to frighten another Moslem? Would you permit me to teach my children that God is greater, more just, and more merciful than all the (religious) scholars on earth combined? And that His standards are different from the standards of those trading the religion, and that His accountability is kinder and more merciful? Would you permit me? By Nizar Qabbani (21.3.1923 to 30.4.1998)

* Nizar Qabbani is a Syrian poet whose poems have had a lot of controversies in Middle East.

(b) Ripples of the mind Ibohal Kshetrimayum an Indian poet philosopher wrote “A Land of Ripples”. It is a beautifully crafted poem and a touching one indeed. It is said that Ibohal is a poet of images; his poetry has an unfailing visual impact. The poem contains the emotion anger despair and frustration of the poet.

“A Land of Ripples” - by Ibohal Kshetrimayum “A land where guns are no longer fired in anger, but in deceitful dreams. A land where people starve for a peaceful recipe, till they are no longer hungry. A land where hypocrites trade divinity, with symbolic rituals. A land where obituaries and condolences, cost a lifetime’s earnings, A land where illiterate grandparents shed spiritual tears, over the illicit affair of god and his concubine. A land where mongrels and swine debate upon, the wisdom to rule or serve. A land where vision takes a back seat, and the cart pleads for progress to the reluctant horse. A land where the sick politician prescribes antidotes to the sedated, like the seasoned harlot who moans like a virgin. A land where a poet wonders aloud, though it’s against the grain to ask: ‘Who caused the Ripples?’

Ibohal Kshetrimayum

The Immigration Officer Asked Me – by Theresa Bacha This seems to be in a prose-poetry format: Story telling – plain and simple but very true and sad. Mass exodus of people take place to flee from prosecution, hunger, poverty, prosecution persecution and perversion and the like. Distressed ones flee for a better life, a better world with nothing but the shirt on their bare bodies and hope and prayers in their hearts. They subject themselves to so much danger and difficulties fleeing from their native land to a land of greener pastures. In danger and difficulty they put their trust in their chosen Gods and flee. They cannot be accused of having basely forsaking the lands of their forefathers. When their own limb and life are threatened, what can they do? They do not expect to be rewarded, awarded or decorated in the new found land. We cannot but admire the courage and fortitude of such peoples.

The Immigration Officer Asked Me – by Theresa Bacha I was asked where are you coming from? I answered I ran away from the war in my country.? I was asked how many years the war lasted? I answered there was war for sixteen years we were bombarded daily attacked by militia on our way to work when we could go to work. I was asked why did you choose this country? I answered because they accept political refugees and i heard that Canadians are helping us.

I was asked why do you look so pale and slim? I answered because we had no food to eat when we were bombarded we could not go out to buy food, and when we were in the shelter nobody brought us any food. I was asked why are you wearing dark glasses? I answered because i am not used to see the light. We rarely had electricity, always using a candle and staying in the dark for days my eye sight weakened.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

I was asked why don’t you hear well? I answered because of the arterially shelling. And we had a bomb falling on our ceiling when I was sitting in our home before the bomb fell.

He asked and where are they now? I answered they ran away from the militia to the US as we had very close friends who took them until they could find work to pay a rented room.

I was asked why do you look shabby? I answered because we never had water. We never had water running in our tapes we had to buy water to have a shower or rain to fill utensils in plastic for many days.

He asked how may languages do you speak? I answered i speak three languages. Arabic English and French.

He asked why don’t you have any luggage? I answered because i have nothing to wear. My kids education needed all the money and i worked 2 jobs to bring in some money.

He asked do you want to stay here? I answered with my tears blinding my eyes, please, i have nowhere to go and i heard so much about the Canadians how human and generous they are.

He asked what kind of work did you do? I answered i was working in the hospital. And working in a Boutique for mens clothing. He asked were you working as a nurse? I answered no i was cleaning the floors and bathrooms i was everywhere for years in that hospital. He asked do you have any money on you? I answered no the militia took everything. When i arrived to the boat to leave the country as the airport was closed for years sometimes, at the port, one militia guy just snatched the few dollars i had.

He looked at me with a painful look I will accept you as a political refugee we will give you some money every month you will have a bed to sleep you will have food to eat work to do water to drink shower and clothes to wear and you can ask your children to come, are you happy now. He stamped my passport and wished me a good luck with a huge smile. The beginning of a new life. By Theresa Bacha

He asked did you leave your home behind? I answered no they bombarded my home its in rebels i have nothing left in Lebanon. He noticed my tears tumbling down my cheeks. He asked where were you living then? I answered i lived underground with many people, for months sometimes we were underground sleeping on the floor somedays we had no food given by the enemy, the cry`s of children hungry was unbearable. He asked do you have any family with you? I answered no i have been alone since the war. I had to send away my children after they were able to graduate not to be snatched by the militia. They both went to the US to work. He asked how many children do you have? I answered i have two boys one is a lawyer and my other son is an interior designer.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Pejabat Imigresen

Alzheimer And Cancer Patient’s Prayer - Carolyn Haynali This is a sad one. It reminds one of the late Justice Dato Fred Arulanandom who, after being struck with cancer and losing his ability to speak, penned a poem to his God praying for speedy relief from his affliction. Fred Arulanandom, who wrote the touching verses below in October 1981, lying in his hospital bed at Mount Miriam, Penang received his God’s call later in February 1982. He was a brave man. For months, after his voice box was removed after an operation in London for cancer of the throat, he struggled on valiantly, living what (in his poem) he called “a living death.” It must have been a living hell for him. He loved his pipe, his wine, his dancing shoes and all that makes life fun with frolic and frivolities. As a Judge, he wrote some very carefully crafted judgments in the Queen’s English. He was an English Scholar. He wrote these touching lines from his hospital bed:

“And so to my window, I go To sit and stare To sit and stare How long, how long, I ask my God But no answer comes, I sit and stare I sit and stare…” I digress to the man behind the poet. A snippet on the good Judge and a good man of the world who was a lover of the English Language. Dato Fred Arulanandom

Born on January 4 1920, the Honourable Mr Justice Arulanandom received his early education at the Victoria Institution in Kuala Lumpur and graduated from Raffles College with a Diploma in Arts and graduated from the University of London with a Diploma in Science and Administration (with distinction). He was a member of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple. He had, before his call to the Bar, taught at Victoria Institution from 1945 to 1946 and was a Social Welfare Officer from 1950 to 1952. In 1953 he was admitted to the Bar in Malaya and practiced law before his elevation to the Bench. He was Founder President of the Malayan Youth Council (1950 to 1954), President of the Bar Committee of Perak (1963) and Vice-President of the Law Association for Asia and the Western Pacific (1968 to 1971) - [MLJ 1974]. Justice Fred Arulanandom wrote some interesting judgments. He wrote about State of Denmark even before Justice N H Chan. In Lui Ah Yong v Superintendent of Prisons, Penang 1972(2) MLJ pg 226 he blasted away thus: “Something is rotten in the State of Denmark.” These words were uttered by Marcellus in Shakespeare’s Hamlet after the ghost of Hamlet’s father appears to Hamlet and beckons Hamlet to follow it, and Hamlet follows. Marcellus uses these words not so much in condemnation but more in frustration and bewilderment.” “This, to say the least, discloses a most scandalous state of affairs and does not bring any credit to the Administration. A man has been incarcerated for the ostensible purpose of deportation and nine years later the court is told, and even that, as a result of a writ of habeas corpus being filed that arrangements to remove him are still in progress. The word progress must surely be used euphemistically. Progress is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as advance, continuous improvement. And here after a passage of nine years during which the authorities have not succeeded in putting a man on a ship, or a plane or even a bullock cart to take him away from the country, it is said that arrangements are in progress. During this period of time space has been conquered, kingdoms have been lost and won and man has even visited the moon and come back. And yet this unfortunate human being unknown to the rest of the world has been deprived of his liberty and held

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

in a prison, while I quote “Arrangements are still in progress to remove him from the Federation.” It is true that the subject matter is a human being and unlike smuggled goods or prohibited imports, he can’t be destroyed by burning or dumped into the sea. But the least one could have expected in a just society would have been for the authorities, when they were faced with problems of deportation, to consider alternate ways of keeping track of him so that when the Order of Removal was ready to be executed, he could be removed without him having to languish in prison for nine years or even longer.” The above is quoted to show the prowess, power and exceptional learning of the Judge and his linguistic ability. He was a fearless Judge. A learned Judge. A linguistic Judge. A humane Judge. Witty wise and versatile. They don’t make Judges like him anymore. Justice Fred Arulanandom on marriage and its strains said thus as follows in the case Kok Yoong Heong v Choong Thean Sang [1976] 1 MLJ pg 293: “It is customary in cases where marriages break down for the parties to make various allegations against each other, complaints which if the bond of affection had remained would have passed unnoticed but because of strained relations assume gigantic proportions. The Applicant’s main grounds of complaint were that the respondent was a man of violent temper, given to physical assaults, niggardly in providing for household expenses, more attached to his mother and sisters than herself and not prepared to make a go at building up a family life with her and her children. The respondent’s complaint was that the applicant was a spend-thrift, disliked household chores or responsibilities, did not care for the children and could not get along with servants. In the voluminous affidavits filed by the parties various instances of petty peccadilloes were enumerated but for the purposes of this case there is no need to deal with them in detail. If one could probe into the lives of many happy families one could find examples galore of such trivia but in happy homes the trace of acrimony.” His comments in court were always quotable. On one occasion, a husband appeared before him and sought an order from the court for the restoration of conjugal rights. “Why do you want conjugal rights,” asked Justice Arulanandom, “From A Wife who would probably be like a piece of wood in bed?” Back to Alzheimer’s German psychiatrist Aloysius “Alois” Alzheimer may have first described the manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease in 1901; as a degenerative condition. Although dementia and Alzheimer’s disease are often considered synonymous they are different. In AD the brain starts to lose neurons – nerve cells that connect different part of our brain Dementia refers to a loss of brain function.

Alzheimer Patient’s Prayer - Carolyn Haynali Pray for me I was once like you. Be kind and loving to me that’s how I would have treated you. Remember I was once someone’s parent or spouse I had a life and a dream for the future. Speak to me, I can hear you even if I don’t understand what you are saying. Speak to me of things in my past of which I can still relate.

Be considerate of me, my days are such a struggle. Think of my feelings because I still have them and can feel pain. Treat me with respect because I would have treated you that way. Think of how I was before I got Alzheimer’s; I was full of life, I had a life, laughed and loved you.

Carolyn Haynali

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Think of how I am now, My disease distorts my thinking, my feelings, and my ability to respond, but I still love you even if I can’t tell you. Think about my future because I used too. Remember I was full of hope for the future just like you are now. Think how it would be to have things locked in your mind and can’t let them out. I need you to understand and not blame me, but Alzheimer’s.

I still need the compassion and the touching and most of all I still need you to love me. Keep me in your prayers because I am between life and death. The love you give will be a blessing from God and both of us will live forever. How you live and what you do today will always be remembered in the heart of the Alzheimer’s Patient. By Carolyn Haynali

Sad Lines of Regret – A wee digression yet again! “It might have been!” are sad words poured out by a sad heart. Maud Muller was written in 1856, by John Greenleaf Whittier (1807-1892). This poem is about an influential Judge and a poor farm hand who saw each other on the road. The lassie thinks it will be nice to be married to a rich and influential man like a Judge and the Judge thinks it will be nice to be married to a young attractive innocent farm hand and lead a rustic life as a farmer and be content in the country. But they do not bring to fruition their mutual desires. Later in life both the Judge and maid had poor marriages. And they reminisce as to what life would have been if they had given in to their initial wishes.

The last lines of the poem may be so true to so many of us, aren’t they? “God pity them both! And pity us all, Who vainly the dreams of youth recall, For all sad words of tongue or pen, The saddest are these; “It might have been!” Ah, well! for us all some sweet hope lies Deeply buried from human eyes; John Greenleaf Whittier And, in the hereafter, angels may Roll the stone from its grave away!” - J.G. Whittier Archibald MacLeish

Sadness may be expressed in poetry and prose. Poets and lawyers have much in common. Archibald MacLeish a Poet Lawyer said: “The phrase poet-lawyer conjures up the image of a half-human, half beast from ancient mythology, a peculiar creature with the head of a poet and a body of a lawyer.”

Cecil Rajendra - Malaysian poet/lawyer

Bards and Barristers have fascination for the language and as Denning said, language and words are a lawyers tools and weapons but a lawyer’s language may appear rather legalistic with all the whys and wherefores that are more like pleadings!

A wee tale by Lord Denning in his own language. “I often tell a little story to expose the literal interpretation. This is of the conveyance who went into a restaurant and ordered some strawberries and cream. What he wanted was the strawberries in a little dish and the cream in a little pot on the side so that he could pour the cream on the strawberries. But when the waitress came back, there they were, the strawberries and cream all swimming together. He said, “Madam, I asked for strawberries and cream

Lord Denning

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

not strawberries with cream.” “You have got them, haven’t you? You have got the strawberries and cream.” “Madam, don’t you know the difference between a woman and child and a woman with child?” Both use, abuse and misuse words. We turn to words when there is so much joy and so much pain. How can joy and pain be placed together? A couple in love is awesome. Out of love it is the cause of so much sadness. So one turns to poetry to express if at all possible, the inexpressible. Some Sociologists say that when a partner “cheats” he or she is not looking for a new love. It is not the affection for the new partner. The partner who strays is looking for what is not present in the current relationship. The vacuum has to be filled. One wonders how one can give so much joy and happiness and after a while so much sadness and become a charlatan at some point of time. All of us are vulnerable to the various and veritable vissitudes and challenges of life. It may well be said to be a mysterious wonder. Of all sad words asked of married men, the saddest are these: “Where have you been?” Oscar Wilde said that “a poet can survive everything but a misprint.” And Carl Sandburg reminisced that “I’ve written some poetry which I don’t understand myself!” Lewis Caroll in “Alice in Wonderland” is worthy of a quote and note: “Humpty Dumpty: When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more or less. Alice: The question is whether you can make words mean so many different things. Humpty Dumpty: The question is: which is to be the master – that’s all” Let your emotions run wild in poetry. Don’t be caged, cocooned or coy. Pontificate the thoughts of Gibran in “The Broken Wings” when he said: “A caged nightingale Weaves no nest.” We should all uncage and unleash our minds and hearts and weave poetry in beautiful thoughts and words be they happy sad or just mad! S. Balarajah 25th November 2014 Johore Bar

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

End the conveyancing monopoly BY DATUK ZAID IBRAHIM Lawyers set outrageous fees despite the fact that the work done does not involve additional skill. WHEN I started my legal practice many years ago, it was quite common for lawyers to give discounts on fees chargeable for conveyancing and loan transactions. In fact, some of us charged time costs to clients because the work was quite straightforward (even if the sums involved were large).

Zaid Ibrahim

In those days, there was already a no-discount rule. The legal fraternity then was more realistic and the Bar Council was lenient when it came to the amount of fees we could charge: no one would be liable for disciplinary action for not following scaled fees, and breaches were more frequent than observance. Those were happy days. By and large, conveyancing and loan documentation for financial institutions are straightforward matters. They usually involve standard terms that lawyers use on a daily basis without much effort (though some lawyers might dispute this). Conveyancing fees are what we call “easy money” – clerks do all the work and lawyers collect their fees for signing on the right pages. The higher the value of the property, or the value of the bank loan, the higher the fee. I have never thought it right to charge high fees on this basis; after all, high-value residential property transacted in Ampang, for example, requires the same work and skill as that of lower-valued property in Klang, so why should there be a difference in fees? The fact is that the scaled fees mandated by the Bar Council favour the lawyer who undertakes larger property transactions – but why this is so can be difficult to understand, and I suggest you read Michael Joseph’s Conveyancing Fraud, which was first published in 1989. Joseph was an English solicitor who did his part to expose the arbitrary and unfair system by which the Law Society of England and Wales (the governing body for solicitors) set outrageous fees despite the fact that the work done had no relation to any additional skill. Ultimately, good sense prevailed and solicitors lost their monopoly over conveyancing in England and Wales. A new breed of professionals called “conveyancers” was given the right to do this work as well and, as a result, fees were much reduced and services improved. That’s what competition does to any industry. But not in Malaysia. Here, the Bar Council still insists that only lawyers can undertake conveyancing work and scaled fees must be strictly followed – a practice abandoned long ago in other Commonwealth countries. When it comes to this issue, the Bar Council somehow always overlooks the question of public interest. It seems that, to the Council, it’s their members’ interests that are more important. The economist Adam Smith warned us 250 years ago that when people of the same trade met, the conversation usually ended up in a conspiracy against the public through the raising of prices. We now have the Competition Act 2010, which in essence seeks to promote the competitive process, and the rule of the game is to discourage anti-competitive behaviour. The stance taken by the Bar has been definitely against the Competition Act, although no one dares to challenge the lawyers’ monopoly.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The question remains: why must lawyers be the only type of professionals allowed to do conveyancing work? A solicitor friend countered this view by saying that the Competition Act itself allows for exclusion. For example, Section 13 of the Act exempts any agreement or conduct that complies with a legislative requirement. My friend argued that the Solicitors’ Remuneration Order 2005 (which allows for scaled fees to be charged) is such a legislative requirement. But wait a minute. I’m not saying that the Bar is in violation of the Competition Act. I’m saying merely that the Bar’s monopoly on conveyancing is not in compliance with the spirit of the Act. The Bar is once again out of touch! The Malaysian Competition Commission, under the able leadership of former Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Siti Norma Yaakob, should exercise its power under Sections 11 and 12 of the Competition Act to perform a “market review” of the situation and publish the results. I am sure such a study will show the need for the establishment of a new breed of professional conveyancers so as to give lawyers some fair competition, and I’m sure the market review will benefit the public immensely. Arguments that conveyancing work is complicated and must be done by lawyers have already been used in Australia and England, and have been found to be baseless – in fact, the quality of conveyancing services in Australia and New Zealand actually improved after the lawyers’ monopoly was broken. In Malaysia, there are many former legal clerks and Land Office employees who can qualify and be registered as conveyancers. Of course, local conveyancers will have to be properly regulated under their own professional standards organisation to ensure that a high quality of work will be maintained. The lawyers’ monopoly has no purpose whatsoever in this day and age. Moreover, given that the Bar Council has always fought for the political and human rights of the people, I believe it should extend this public spirit to conveyancing and other spheres, even if it means less “easy money” for lawyers. In fact, the real test of our commitment to a particular cause is our willingness to persist even if it hits our pockets, so I say again: the public will surely benefit from an end to the conveyancing monopoly, services will improve and prices will fall. So why can’t we do it? > Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, true to his Kelantan roots, is highly passionate about practically everything, hence the name of this column. Having established himself in the legal fraternity, Zaid ventured into politics and has been on both sides of the political divide. The former de facto Law Minister at one time is now a legal consultant but will not hesitate to say his piece on any current issue. He can be reached at zaid.ibrahim@partners-corp.com. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

By Datuk Zaid Ibrahim Extracted from The Star 9th May 2014

Leave conveyancing to lawyers By Chang Kim Loong

THE National House Buyers’ Association (HBA) would gladly defend purchasers’ rights against lawyers but is unable to uphold Datuk Zaid Ibrahim’s concern for them. I am referring to his article in The Star (May 5) titled: End the conveyancing monopoly.

Chang Kim Loong

First of all, he says that the conveyancing fee paid by purchasers to their solicitors, based on the scale set out in the Solicitors’ Remuneration Order (SRO), is too high for the routine, mechanical work that they do. Admittedly, the monotonous work is not very difficult compared to litigation. But the fee is not for the work of the conveyancing solicitor but for the liability he or she bears. The fee is based on the value of the property, hence, it varies. If the transaction fails because of the neglect of the solicitor, the damages recoverable from the Malaysian solicitor would be calculated, like the fee, on the basis of the value of the property in question. English practice No doubt the scaled fee has been abolished in England and solicitors have lost their monopoly of such work. This happened as a consequence of the introduction of the registration of titles system replacing the titles deeds system in respect of residential properties in England. Before this, the English solicitor had a number of responsibilities: creating the title deeds; keeping them safe in his office; and, most importantly, being able to vouch to a future purchaser that the property is indeed safe to buy. These functions have now been taken over by the state in England and in Malaysia much earlier. But the responsibility is still that of the lawyer. When it was introduced in England, the scaled fee was also intended by society to serve as a subsidy to lawyers for doing unprofitable work; litigation for the poor. With the abolition of scaled fees in England, the state has had to fund legal aid. In England, lawyers are paid by the state but not in Malaysia. These payments by the state have become a constant point of attrition between the state and the Bar in England because of the ballooning financial allocation that has to be made every year. Malaysian practice In Malaysia, volunteer lawyers of the Malaysian Bar’s legal aid service receive not a penny from the state but pittance from the Legal Aid Fund. This is the one important aspect in which the Malaysian lawyer bears a greater responsibility for the public, in exchange for retaining scaled fees, than the English solicitor. The Malaysian lawyer is able to observe the “cab-rank rule” better (Rule 2 Practice and Etiquette Rules 1978). The “cab-rank rule” holds that a lawyer must be available to any client who requires his services, like taxis waiting in rank; the taxi driver has no choice but to accept the passenger who wants him; subject to certain conditions, most importantly, he is too poor to afford the services of a lawyer As a fused profession – advocates and solicitors – in Malaysia, lawyers are able to observe the “cab-rank rule” in litigation and in non-litigation matters.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The English solicitor does not have to observe this rule at all; only barristers do and only with respect to litigation in higher levels of court. The Malaysian lawyer handles both conveyancing and litigation at all levels of court. In addition, Malaysian lawyers pay an annual contribution, whether they earn conveyancing fees or not, to the Legal Aid Fund operated by the Malaysian Bar.

Discounted legal fees We do acknowledge that the amount of work that has to be done should be, and is, taken into account in the scaled fees. However, in a case where the purchase transaction is governed by the Housing Development (Control & Licensing) Act, 1996 (HDA transaction), or where a loan is obtained to finance a HDA transaction, a permitted lower scale of fees will apply – to as low as 35%. (See Table 2) Such discounted legal fees are certainly to the benefit of purchasers. Regardless that the said sale & purchase agreement is in statutory form, professional insurance still have to be purchased by lawyers to cover all circumstances. To my mind, the scaled fees work better for the lower income group. Without the scaled fees, I think lawyers will likely charge more for lower-end properties because the amount of work involved is often the same as higher-end properties. In the case of purchase of a low-cost house, it entails having to apply for the formal consent of the state authorities, land office and sometimes the local council on top of having to recite the status of the property in the sale & purchase contract – that’s more tedious work than a higher-end freehold property. With the compulsory discount, I do not think house buyers for low- and medium-cost houses are overcharged.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Solicitors’ Remuneration Order (SRO) The Solicitors’ Remuneration Order 2005 (the SRO 2005) came into force on Jan 1, 2006. It was gazetted on Dec 31, 2005. Check out the SRO 2005 at http://www.hba.org.my/faq/solicitor/SolicitorsRemuneration Order2006.pdf New scale fees are prevalent: Some legal fees are of a fixed sum (fixed fee) and others are fixed by means of a scale (scale fee). For ease of reference, a brief table of the current scale fees for transfers and charges is worked out as follows. (See Table 1) The SRO was drawn up by the Solicitors’ Costs Committee comprising representatives of the judiciary, the Attorney-General – who are there to protect public interest – and the Bar Council under the Legal Profession Act. Monopoly or encroachment We would also like readers to know that lawyers do want to keep their monopoly (and scaled fees) from encroachment by other professionals or upstart quacks. But they also observe the same restrictions against themselves; no encroachment on the turfs of others; a lawyer is required to earn his/her living only by lawyering; not by moonlighting; Rule 44 Practice and Etiquette Rules 1978. By concentrating on legal practice to earn their living they are expected to and they do become better and better at it for the public benefit ultimately. As to the monopoly mentioned in the article, who should we allow to do conveyancing work if not the lawyers? The “conveyancers” in the UK (those allowed to do conveyancing, other than solicitors) have to sit for exams rather like the solicitors to be qualified. I don’t know how they are regulated but I would think that it has to be a regulated body because stakeholders’ monies are involved. Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association.

By Chang Kim Loong Extracted from The Star 21st May 2014

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

ELEVATION OF THE HONOURABLE YA TUAN TEO SAY ENG as a Judge of the High Court of Malaya The Johore Bar takes great pleasure in congratulating the Honourable Tuan Teo Say Eng on his elevation to the Bench of the High Court of Malaya. The appointment took effect on 12th September 2014. The Elevation ceremony was held in the Civil High Court of Johor Bahru on Tuesday, 4th November 2014, on his birthday, to mark His Lordship’s elevation and followed by a Dinner at the Renaissance Hotel Johor Bahru. The proceedings commenced with Mr. R. Jayabalan, Chairman of the Johore Bar Committee offering his felicitations welcoming His Lordship to the Bench, followed by Mr. S. Gunasegaran, representing the Malaysian Bar and Tuan Lee Chee Thim, Senior Federal Counsel representing the Honourable Attorney General of Malaysia. In reply, the Honourable Justice Tuan Teo Say Eng expressed his sincere appreciation for the kind words said about him. For the benefit of our readers, we reproduce here the speeches made at the Elevation Ceremony.

Speech by Mr. R. Jayabalan, Chairman of the Johore Bar Committee May it please you My Lord, My name is R. Jayabalan and I am appearing on behalf of the Johore Bar. My learned friend Mr. S. Gunasegaran is appearing on behalf of the President of the Malaysian Bar. My learned friend Tuan Saiful Edris, Head of Prosecution Unit Johor Bahru and Federal Counsel Mr. Lee Chee Thim are appearing on behalf of the Attorney General’s Chambers and the State Legal Advisor.

R. Jayabalan

I also wish to put on record the presence of the members of the Bar and judicial officers here today to witness the proceedings. My Lord, I rise on this pleasant occasion, on behalf of the Johore Bar, to extend our warmest congratulations and felicitations on Your Lordship’s elevation as a Judge of the High Court of Malaya by His Majesty the Yang Dipertuan Agong on 12.9.2014. This, of course, is a very proud and momentous occasion for Your Lordship. It is a moment that Your Lordship must have eagerly awaited, over the years, and pleasantly accepted, when it finally arrived. It must be a moment of joy for Your Lordship’s family as well. On this note, a special mention is also merited for the presence of Your Lordship’s mother Mdm Lee Bee Poh, beloved spouse Mdm Poh Hui Lin and daughter Eunice Teo Su Yin and relatives who are here to witness with pride Your Lordship’s elevation to the Bench of the High Court. To be appointed as the King’s Judge is a great honour. It is one that recognizes not only Your Lordship’s years of service in the administration of justice but also Your Lordship’s ability, integrity and intellectual capacity in dispensing justice. On occasions like this, as we are celebrating the recognition accorded to Your Lordship, it is only fair that we should also recall and recollect Your Lordship’s journey of service that has now reached the high station of a permanent seat on the Bench.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Your Lordship was born in Gemas, Negeri Sembilan on 4.11.1951. Yes, 4th November - that is a give away. It is your Lordship’s birthday today - a significant day in Your Lordship’s life and hopefully today’s proceedings will add more joy to Your Lordship. On behalf of the Johore Bar, I wish Your Lordship a very momentous and happy birthday and many more returns of the day for a long time to come. Your Lordship read law at University of London and also Universiti of Malaya and hold the degree of LLB with Hons from both these institutions. Your Lordship also hold a Masters In Law LLM from National University of Singapore and University of London. Your Lordship’s career in the legal profession, or may I say dalliance with the law, took off rather humbly when Your Lordship started serving as a Chinese Court Interpreter on 25.1.1973 – that I believe in Johor Bahru as well. During your time Your Lordship must have watched a great many illustrious names of the Bar dazzling the court with their skill, advocacy and legal warfare before the equally illustrious names from the Bench of those days. This experience must have had a great effect and piqued Your Lordship’s interest in law – for Your Lordship then in June 1980 set off to read law at that iconic Universiti Malaya Law Faculty. Your Lordship completed the law degree in May 1984. Judicial career soon commenced on 14.8.1984 when Your Lordship started serving as Magistrate in Sitiawan Perak until 30.4.1987 and after that until 18.12.1988 as Magistrate in Muar. Between 19.12.1988 - 15.2.1992 Your Lordship served as Senior Assistant Registrar at the High Court in Johor Bahru. Between 16.2.1992 - 15.7.1992 Your Lordship served as Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court in Kuching and then as Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court in Kuala Lumpur until 30.11.1992. It was during this time on 21.8.1992 that Your Lordship sort of completed the cycle by also getting to be admitted as Advocates and Solicitors of the High Court. A return to Johor Bahru followed. And this turn out to be along stay in Johor Bahru in various judicial and prosecutorial capacity. First as Sessions Judge from 1.12.1992 – 31.7.1993 and then between 1.8.1993-31.10.1994 as the Deputy Registrar of the High Court. A change of perspective followed – that is from the bench to before the bench. From 1.11.1994 Your Lordship served as DPP before promoted as Senior DPP and as Ketua Unit Pendakwaan in Johor bahru between 2.5.2000 - 30.4.2004. After that Your Lordship was appointed as Ketua Unit Rayuan, Bahagian Pendakwaan between 1.5.2004 -15.4.2005. Service at a rather unique settings followed on 16.4.2005 when Your Lordship moved to the Ministry of Defence and served as Ketua Hakim Peguam – I believe Judge Advocate General – more glamourously known as JAG – until 4.11.2007. Your Lordship then took a short retirement on 4.11.2007 before returning as the Industrial Court Chairman on 15.7.2008 and served at the Industrial Court in Kuala Lumpur. This was until 14.8.2009 when Your Lordship was appointed as a Judicial Commissioner and posted to serve at the High Court in Ipoh and Taiping until 14.6.2012.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

As we can look back and see - Johor Bahru has seen Your Lordship in various capacities over the years. But apparently we have not seen it enough. For on 15.6.2012 Your Lordship returned to this city, this time as Judicial Commissioner at the High Court. Your Lordship went on with the task and answered the call of duty in Your Lordship’s usual gentle, quiet and unassuming manner. And then on 12.9.2014 the pleasant announcement came – and one that perhaps was much awaited - that Your Lordship is to be elevated by the Yang Dipertuan Agung as His Majesty’s Judge. It seems like Your Lordship is not one who believes in comfort zone as such. Your Lordship appears to be one who is not contented with simply carrying on with the task in hand and leave the days go by. On the contrary Your Lordship seems to be someone who is always game at trying something new. We have seen that tendency earlier on in Your Lordship’s career when Your Lordship rose from being a court interpreter to being a judge, prosecutor and other judicial capacity. We also saw that tendency when Your Lordship found time to be called to the Bar. But obviously Your Lordship thought that that is not enough. Despite the burden of work, the case load, the files, Your Lordship managed to find time to write several lawbooks – many of which are sought after by practitioners especially those from the criminal Bar and the judicial and legal officers. The books written by Your Lordship are : 1. Malaysian Criminal Litigation Manual – published in 2004 2. A Practical Handbook on Criminal Prosecution in the Subordinate Courts – a well known book that is now in 3rd Edition – 2006 3. Your Rights and the Law – 2007 4. Pendakwaan Jenayah di Mahkamah Rendah – another sought after book – that is now in 2nd Edtion – 2008 5. A niche title followed in 2009 when Your Lordship wrote the book Military Proceedings in Malaysia. Your Lordship’s public service was also recognized by His Majesty with pingat Ahli Mangku Negara (AMN) in 2000 and Kesatria Mangku Negara (KMN) in 2007. Your Lordship’s career that started in 1973 with a humble beginning as Court Interpreter – has after 40 years – reached a significant glowing milestone now with the appointment as the King’s Judge. It is one that Your Lordship has earned after a long and dedicated public service – and must be with plenty of hardwork. It is one that Your Lordship would no doubt recall with fondness and justifiably, with a sense of achievement and triumph. My Lord, It is customary that the Bar, in occasions like this, not only welcomes the Judge but also takes the opportunity to pass a few words of advisory. After all, it is not often that we lawyers get a chance to advice the Judge! This is a rare opportunity and I am not about to miss that. Such friendly advisory is only natural and to be welcomed for the Bar and the Bench are perennial partners – or in modern corporate parlance “biggest stakeholders” in the administration of justice. One cannot exist meaningfully without the other.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

My Lord, A Judge is expected to live by strict moral code and with a strong sense of consciousness of what he does, what he says, where he goes and who he meets. And in the internet age, what he reads also matters. That is the strict code that he has to live by. That is the nature of his office. This code defines the Judge, his life and - long after his retirement – his legacy. A Judge is to hold firm his oath of office, uphold the Constitution and discharge his duty of dispensing justice to the community in which he lives without fear or favour. In this, the Judges Code of Ethics becomes his judicial conscience and compass. The Chief Justice of Australia, Right Honourable Sir Gerard Brennan addressed a conference of newly appointed judges on “The Role of the Judge” on 13.10.1996 and this is what His Lordship said and I quote: “A judge’s role is to serve the community in the pivotal role of administering justice according to law. Your office gives you that opportunity and that is a privilege. Your office requires you so to serve, and that is a duty. No doubt there were a number of other reasons, personal and professional, for accepting appointment, but the judge will not succeed and will not find satisfaction in his or her duties unless there is a continual realisation of the importance of the community service that is rendered. Freedom, peace, order and good government - the essentials of the society we treasure - depend in the ultimate analysis on the faithful performance of judicial duty. It is only when the community has confidence in the integrity and capacity of the judiciary that the community is governed by the rule of law. Knowing this, you must have a high conceit of the importance of your office. When the work loses its novelty, when the case load resembles the burdens of Sisyphus, when the tyranny of reserved judgments palls, the only permanently sustaining motivation to strive onwards is the realisation that what you are called on to do is essential to the society in which you live.” I would humbly submit that this words illustrates that despite the strict moral code that a Judge lives by, despite the apparent isolation that he is subjected to, he is an essential part of the society and his actions, which in the context of courts would be his decisions, resonates within the society, influences the society and shapes the public perception towards the judiciary and rule of law as a whole. My Lord, In the current climate of just, expeditious and economical disposal of cases which places importance on case disposal and rate of disposal coupled with quantitative indicators, this passage on the role of a judge becomes even more relevant. The society would no doubt appreciate, and indeed grateful, that the Judges, and by extension, the Courts, are resolving their disputes in a much faster and expedient manner – gone are the days of 5-7 years and sometimes longer wait for trials - the society would also expect - and that is a very reasonable expectation - that justice is adequately served in the course – that justness is not left behind in the contest with efficience and expedience. In terms of day to day affairs of a Judge, an interesting guide was given by Justice Francis Mc Carthy from the Superior Court of California when he wrote about the Good Judge in the Journal of the American Judicature Society in 1975 and I quote : “… A Judge who takes the following precepts to heart should prove an asset to any Bench. • Remember that you are a servant of the people – not their master • Advice your bailiff, clerk and court interpreter – that they are also public servants and must be courteous and helpful. • Keep in mind that most witnesses are on the stand for the first time. What may appear to be arrogance or rudeness may well be the result of nervousness or outright stage fright. The same can be said of some lawyers. • Admonish (when necessary) attorneys, witnesses gently, quietly and firmly. It is far more effective than ‘telling them off’.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

• Retain your sense of humour • Make everyone in your court feel comfortable and at ease. Let others keep a normal, decent schedule. Don’t make them work through lunch hour, dinner time or late at night. To do so is inefficient, unhealthful, and many times cruel. • Take the bench on time – in the morning, after recess, in the afternoon. An inexcusable failure to do this justifiably disturbs and upsets lawyers and witnesses.” It is my hope that Your Lordship would take kindly to this friendly words from your partner the Bar. Your Lordship came to Johor Bahru as Judicial Commissioner and has served here for more than 2 years now. During this period many of us here had had the opportunity to appear before Your Lordship. Your Lordship has displayed common courtesy, mutual respect and kindness in dealing with lawyers and litigants alike. In many instances when cases had stretched for numerous days with long hours and exceptionally high number of witnesses. Your Lordship has displayed a high degree patience and perseverance in dealing with the parties and the attention on the matter at hand had never wavered. And the right judicial temperament was also displayed. The Bar is thankful for this. Your Lordship has also shown that mediation is an effective tool in resolving disputes - when skillfully deployed. All cases can be resolved amicably, anytime and at any stage so long as the parties and their lawyers put their hearts and minds to it. Your Lordship’s skill and patience in assisting the parties to reach an amicable settlement is well known amongst lawyers in Johor Bahru so much so that Your Lordship has become the Judge of choice when parties are considering settlement. My Lord, Administering justice is not an easy task. More so in the current climate where mechanisms of case management and statistical evaluations have placed additional responsibilities on the courts – and by extension on the judges as well. However Your Lordship would not be alone in this task and can count on the Bar for support. On this note, on behalf of the members who are present today and that of the Johore Bar I pledge our fullest support and co-operation to Your Lordship in carrying out your judicial responsibilities. Once again, on behalf of the Johore Bar and those who are present here today, I congratulate Your Lordship on your elevation and wish you a healthy life with a long and distinguished career on the Bench. And a happy birthday again as well! Thank you My Lord. R. JAYABALAN Chairman Johore Bar Committee

Speech by Mr. S. Gunasegaran, Johore Bar Representative May it please you My Lord, It is truly an honour, pleasure and privelege to appear before Your Lordship this morning to congratulate and to welcome you on your elevation as a Judge of the High Court of Malaya. 44

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

S. Gunasegaran

I speak on behalf of the President of the Malaysian Bar who is unable to be present here this morning to share this joyful occasion with Your Lordship and for which he has asked me to convey his humblest apologies to Your Lordship. My Lord, kindly allow me to offer on behalf of of the President and Members of the Malaysian Bar our heartiest congratulations on your appointment as a Judge of the High Court of Malaya by DYMM the Yang Dipertuan Agong w.e.f. 12th September 2014. Your Lordship’s appointment is undoubtedly a fitting and deserving one. It is not a success or achievement that has come overnight but is the result of a long and distinguished service in the law spanning well over four decades and a recognition of Your Lordship’s vast knowledge of and experience in the law. The Chairman of the Johore Bar has done an excellent job of tracing Your Lordship’s long and arduous journey in the service of the law and hence I do not propose to repeat what has already been said. In my address I shall focus on the attributes and abilities of His Lordship that make him eminently qualified to hold the position of His Majesty’s Judge. First and foremost, there can be no doubt that Your Lordship brings with you to the Bench a wealth of knowledge and experience in the law. In a career covering 41 years you have served as Interpreter, Magistrate, Senior Assistant Registrar, Deputy Registrar of the then Supreme Court and later of the High Court, Sessions Court Judge, Deputy Public Prosecutor, Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor, Judge AdvocateGeneral and Chairman of the Industrial Court before being appointed as Judicial Commissioner of the High Court of Malaya w.e.f. 14th August 2009. Your Lordship served as Judicial Commissioner for five long years, initially at the Ipoh and Taiping High Courts and later at the Johor Bahru High Court before the present appointment. Each of the positions held by Your Lordship would have played its unique part in contributing to your legal knowledge and acumen and in preparing you for this august position. Your Lordship has seen and experienced everything, and from both sides of the fence. We are confident that your enormous legal knowledge and experience in the law are your biggest assets and will guide you well in the discharge of your onerous judicial functions. Secondly, those among us who have been in practice in Johor Bahru long enough will recollect and cherish our long acquaintance and association with Your Lordship during the many years you served in Johor, particularly in Johor Bahru, in one capacity or another from 1987 to 2000. It was always a pleasure to appear before you whether as a Magistrate, Sessions Court Judge or SAR as you had a cheerful disposition, were always very polite and kind to the counsel, litigants and witnesses who appeared before you and gave them all a fair hearing. As a DPP you were known to be a firm but fair prosecutor who always treated his opponents with respect. When Your Lordship left Johor Bahru in 2014 and returned eight years later as a Judicial Commissioner, we were happy to note that none of those fine attributes had vanished or changed. Courtesy, compassion and patience are some of the essential components of a judge’s personality. These qualities contitute what is popularly referred to as “good judicial temperament.” We have no doubt that Your Lordship’s judicial temperament together with your vast knowledge and experience in the law, will serve as the twin pillar of strength, in your quest to dispense justice to the persons who appear in your court. Thirdly, Your Lordship’s passion for learning and scholarship is also well known. Your Lordship has the unique distinction of obtaining two Bachelors degrees in Law, one from the University of London, and another from the University of Malaya, and two Masters degrees in Law, one from the National University of Singapore and another from the University of London. So His Lordship is a double LL. B and double LL.M. holder. When he was still in active government service, he also found time to get admitted and INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

enrolled as an Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya on 21st August 1992. If he had gone into practice, he would have been a very senior lawyer of 22 years’ standing today. His Lordship’s scholarship is further demonstrated by the five books that he had authored, namely: (1) Malaysian Criminal Litigation Manual (2) Pendakwaan Jenayah Dalam Mahkamah Rendah (3) A Practical Handbook on Criminal Prosecution in the Subordinate Courts (4) Your Rights and the Law (5) Military Legal Proceedings in Malaysia. Of the five books, the first three, dealing with criminal law and practice, have become an invaluable and indispensable source-book for both prosecutors and criminal law practitioners and are frequently quoted in the criminal courts throughout the country, My Lord, when you took your oath of office as a Judge of the High Court you had pledged “to discharge your judicial duties to the best of your ability, to bear true faith and allegience to Malaysia and to preserve, protect and defend its Constitution.” The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that it is the sacrosanct duty of all judges to uphold and protect it all times, without fear or favour. The Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Arifin bin Zakaria, at the Opening of the Legal Year 2014 on 11th January 2014 had this to say on the role of judges: “The primary duty of the Judiciary is to dispense justice as entrusted upon us by the Federal Constitution.” Judges work within the closed confines of a courtroom. Everyday they see litigants, in all colours, shapes and types, to present and argue their cases. These people do not come to court in vain, for fun or to waste the court’s time. They do so because they have a problem and hope that the court will resolve it for them. To them the courts are the last bastion of their rights and liberties. A good judge knows this and strives to do his best to help help the litigants attain their objective. He will let the litigants have their day in court and will not do anything that disrupts it. And as someone very wisely said, the most important person in the courtroom is not the judge or the lawyer, but the person who is going to lose the case. So it is important that he be heard fully and fairly. The last few years have seen a dramatic transformation of the litigation landscape in the country. We have slowly but surely moved away from the sluggish, lethargic and inefficient ways of the past and put in place various measures to expedite the disposal of cases. This is both a boon and a bane. Boon because the public can hope to see a quick resolution of their disputes; bane because there is a real danger that in the eagerness to speed up the disposal of cases, we may at times unwittingly be scarifying justice at the altar of expediency. If this happens it negates the very purpose or reason for the existence of courts. Once again, the salutary words of caution given by the Rt. Hon. Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tan Sri Arifin Bin Zakaria (as he then was), on the occasion of his own appointment of Chief Justice of Malaysia on 14th September 2011 ought to be heeded: “Dengan terlaksananya perancangan-perancangan yang saya sebutkan di atas, saya percaya, kita akan dapat mencapai tahap kecekapan yang setanding dengan Badan Kehakiman di negara-negara maju. Namun begitu, kita perlu ingat, kecekapan bukanlah segala-galanya. Apa yang perlu dititik beratkan juga ialah kualiti penghakiman kita. Perlu diingat, tugas kita yang utama ialah untuk melaksanakan keadilan di antara pihak-pihak yang bertelagah. Oleh itu, keputusan kita hendaklah dibuat dengan adil dan saksama, tidak kira dalam apa jua keadaan sekali pun. Ringkasnya, keadilan hendaklah di utamakan tanpa sebarang kompromi. Integriti dan kebebasan Kehakiman hendaklah

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

sentiasa dipertahankan, kerana Badan Kehakiman merupakan benteng terakhir bagi rakyat mendapat keadilan. Dalam hubungan ini juga, setiap lapisan masyarakat hendaklah diberi akses yang tidak terhad kepada keadilan tanpa sebarang halangan.” Finally, My Lord, the concepts of separation of powers and the independence of the Judiciary are two fundamental principles of our parliamentary system of government, and are deeply enshrined and entrenched in our Constitution. Yet it is not something that can always be taken for granted. The Judiciary throughout the world is vulnerable to all forms of intrusions and invasions from various quarters, in particular the Executive, We have in our own time witnessed various acts of intrusion, often with dire consequences. The Judiciary must therefore be vigilant against any form of violation and jealously guard its independence. The Malaysian Bar is wholly committed to the independence of the judiciary, is always vigilant against any form of threat to it, and is ever willing to support and work together with the judiciary to uphold and promote it. My Lord, I associate myself fully with the sentiments expressed by the Chairman of the Johore Bar in his speech. Before I conclude may I once again congratulate Your Lordship on your elevation to the Bench. On behalf of the President and my colleagues at the Bar I pledge our fullest support and co-operation to you in the performance of your judicial functions and duties. I also pray for your continued good health and a long and distinguished career on the Bench. Finally as today is also Your Lordship’s birthday, I also wish you a very Happy Birthday and many happy returns of the day. Thank You. S. GUNASEGARAN Johore Bar Representative JOHORE BAR COMMITTEE

Speech by Tuan Lee Chee Thim, Senior Federal Counsel Yang Arif, Datuk Datuk, YB Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor En Jayabalan, Yg Bahagia KUP- Tn Saiful Ederis, Tuan Tuan dan Puan Puan rakan rakan peguam dan ahli keluarga YA dan para hadirin yang dihormati sekalian. Dengan izin Yg Arif saya memohon untuk berucap dalam Bahasa Inggeris. My Lord , it is with utmost pleasure that we are given this opportunity to be part of this auspicious ceremony, to be able to celebrate Your Lordship’s appointment as a judge of the High Court of Malaya.

Lee Chee Thim

On behalf of the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia, we both, Tn Saiful Ederis and myself would like to congratulate Your Lordship’s appointment to this most respectable and dignified position. Yang Arif has a chequered and most interesting career path, rising from the position of an Court interpreter to Magistrate, SAR, DPP , Senior DPP , Head of Appeal’s Unit, Prosecution Division, JAG , Industrial Court Chairman , JC and finally a High Court judge. Yang Arif Teoh is a man known for your diligence and is a prolific writer as we can see from the 5 books that Yang Arif has written. On the home front, Yang Arif is a filial son and would call his 94 year old mother every day without fail. They say behind every successful man is a woman and it is without exception that credit must also go to YA Teo’s INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

loving spouse, Madam Poh Hui Lin who had to experience more than 5 years of sacrifice ie. living without her husband’s daily presence when he was posted to KL and IPOH. His eldest son You Jin who is doing his PhD in Tropical Diseases must have seen his father spend long hours on preparing his cases at home. However that did not deter Yang Arif’s daughter Eunice from becoming a lawyer. Last but not least, in closing, on behalf of the Attorney General’s Chambers and the State Legal Adviser, I would again congratulate Yang Arif for your appointment and wishing you good health, happiness and success in his career. Thank you. Lee Chee Thim Head of Civil Unit Johor

In reply, speech by YA Tuan Teo Say Eng Mr. R. Jayabalan the Chairman of the Johore Bar Mr. Lee Chee Thim, representative of the Attorney General’s Chambers and the Legal Adviser of the State of Johor. Mr. S.Gunasegaran, Malaysian Bar Representative, fellow Legal Officers, members of the Bar, ladies and gentlemen.

YA Tuan Teo Say Eng

I am indeed honoured and deeply touched by the generosity of the words uttered and the very warm welcome extended to me this morning. I am not sure if I deserve them but I shall assure you that I would strive to do my best to justify them. It was 41 years ago in 1973 when I first joined the Judiciary as a student interpreter. Today I am a Judge of the High Court of Malaya. For nearly 4 decades I have been with the Judiciary so to speak. I have indeed come a long way from an interpreter to a Judge of the High Court of Malaya. Since young, my ambition was to be a teacher probably because I was under the influence of my parents. My late father was an ex-Chinese School headmaster and my mother was also an ex-teacher. Somehow or others, I did not manage to get into a teachers’ training college but ended up as a Court interpreter. I developed my interest in law when I was a Court interpreter. In 1980 I was admitted to read law in the University of Malaya. After my graduation, I joined the Legal and Judicial Service as a Magistrate in 1984. I have served 10 years in Courts as Senior Assistant Registrar, Deputy Registrar, Research Officer and Sessions Court Judge. I then have had the opportunity and the honour to serve in the Attorney General’s Chambers as Senior Federal Counsel and Deputy Public Prosecutor. In the year 2000, I was appointed by the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah the former AG as the 8th Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor and was heading the prosecution unit for the State of Johor. Thereafter I was transferred to head the Appeal Unit in the Prosecution Division in the A.G’s Chambers. All in all, I have served the Chambers for about 11 years. In 2005 I was appointed by His Majesty the Yang DiPertuan Agong as the Judge Advocate General in the Ministry of Defence. I retired in that post in November 2007. A few months after my retirement I was offered the post of an Industrial Court Chairman. In 2009, I was very honoured indeed to be appointed as a Judicial Commissioner by His Majesty the Yang DiPertuan Agong and was confirmed as a High Court Judge on 12th September 2014. Having worked for 5 years as a Judicial Commissioner hearing criminal as well as civil matters, I am fully aware of the heavy responsibilities placed upon a Judge of the High Court. I must admit that the knowledge and 48

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

experience which I have acquired in the past on the Bench and in the A.G’s Chambers alone are not sufficient for me to discharge the duties of my new office. However, with the assurance of co-operation and assistance from the Bar and the Legal and Judicial Service, 1 am confident that I am able to discharge my duties as a Judge. I am fully aware that a Judge’s life is by no means easy because too much is expected of him. I remember one Professor Jafre has this to say about the qualities of a Judge: “A Judge is exalted as law giver and a prophet. He must have the wisdom of Solomon, the moral vision of Isaiah, the analytic power of Socretes, the intellectual creativity of Aristotle, the humanity of Lincoln and the impartiality of the Almighty”. I believe that the above is an overstatement of the qualities of a Judge. No Judge could measure up to such expectations simply because Judges are humans and we too have weaknesses and limitations. Be that as it may, on my part, I will assure you that I shall discharge my judicial duties in a manner worthy of the trust and confidence you have placed upon me. In so doing, 1 shall always abide by the following “10 commandments” so to speak: (i)

I shall preserve, protect and defend our Constitution.

(ii) I shall administer justice in accordance with the laws of the country. (iii) I shall ensure that a Judge should be absolutely independent of the Executive. (iv) I shall be impartial that is, to hear a case without fear or favour; (v)

I shall give all parties a good hearing.

(vi) I shall hear and consider all that a party has to say before coming to a decision against him. (iii) I shall act only on the evidence properly before me and not on any information which I receive from outside, (vii) I shall be patient. (viii) I shall be polite and not to be rude. (ix) I shall be upright and honest. Last but not least, 1 am very grateful to the Johor Bar for holding this elevation ceremony on my birthday. I am also glad that my wife Poh Hui Lin, my daughter Eunice Teo Su Yin, my mother Lee Bee Poh who is now 94 years old, relatives and friends are here to witness this ceremony. I must say ‘Thank You’ to all of you who have taken time off from your busy schedule to be here for this ceremony. Finally, I pray to the Almighty God to give me the wisdom, health and strength in the discharge of my judicial duties as a High Court Judge. It is now my pleasure to invite all of you for some refreshment. The Court is adjourned. TEO SAY ENG, JUDGE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA JOHOR BAHRU JOHOR. 4TH NOVEMBER 2014

The Teo Family

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Pictures at the Elevation Ceremony In Honour of Tuan Teo Say Eng on 4th November 2014

Distinguished!

Dr Sabirin congratulates Tuan Teo

Time to look at my handphone

Another photo!

All smiles…

Judges of the Johor Bahru High Court

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Elevation Dinner In Honour of YA Tuan Teo Say Eng on 4th November 2014 at Renaissance Hotel Johor Bahru In conjunction with the Elevation Ceremony held on 4th November 2014 to welcome His Lordship Tuan Teo Say Eng to the Bench of the High Court, the Social Sub Committee of the Johore Bar organized a Dinner in honour of YA Tuan Teo Say Eng, on the same day of YAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s birthday at the Renaissance Hotel Masai, Johor. The Dinner was well attended by members of the Johore Bar, who seized the opportunity to extend their congratulations and best wishes to His Lordship.

Waiting for food

YA Teo: Thanks a million!

A surprise birthday cake!

Praying for fast service

Smart and casual

A happy lot

Scrutiny of the menu

Nice food..

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

Hyde Park Corner - A Miscellany-At-Law and A Potpouri compiled by S. Balarajah George E. Barrett, Nashville desegregation lawyer, dies at 86

NUS-ASIA’S TOP UNIVERSITY AND 22ND IN THE WORLD MOVING UP TWO SPOTS from its 24th position last year, the National University of Singapore (NUS) is now placed 22nd in the 2014/2015 Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings, retaining its position as the top university in Asia. Ranked the world’s top 10 for academic and employer reputation, the University has retained its ninth position for academic reputation, and clinched the 10th spot worldwide for employer reputation. In terms of the number of research papers published and citations generated, the University has also improved significantly. Up by four spots from 17th position last year, Arts and Humanities is now placed 13th in the world. The other faculty areas are placed in the following order: Engineering and Technology (7), Life Sciences and Medicine (27), Natural Sciences (13), Social Sciences and Management (9). (The Alumnus Oct – Dec 2014/Issue99)

US first black attorney-general resigns WASHINGTONL: Eric Holder, America’s first black attorney-general and an unflinching champion of civil rights in enforcing the nation’s laws, announced his resignation after leading the Justice Department since the first days of President Barack Obama’s term. He is the fourthlongest-serving attorney general in US History. (The Star, 27-9-2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

George E. Barrett, a tenacious Nashville lawyer who represented unions, consumers, a strip club and the Democratic Party but was best known for his victorious 38year campaign to desegregate Tennessee universities, died on Tuesday in Nashville. He was 86. Obituary His family said the cause was acute pancreatitis. Mr Barrett, who came from a working-class Roman Catholic background, liked to say he would sue anyone but the pope. But his predilection was to represent people and causes in which he believed, and in 1960 he defended students arrested for trying to eat at segregated lunch counters. He did not join the protest, however, or others that came along later. “Either you can be a lawyer or a demonstrator, but you can’t do both,” he told a Vanderbilt Law School alumni publication in 2012. “I was glad to manage protest routes and get Vietnam demonstrators out of jail, but I won’t march with you. I think a lawyer has to decide.” (International New York Times, 2-9-2014)

Two VIPs ejected by irate passengers

ISLAMABAD: Passengers on a Pakistan International Airline (PIA) flight from Karachi barred two politicians from boarding after the two VIPs delayed the flight by over two hours. A video clip was posted online showing Senator Rehman Malik and Dr Ramesh Kumar Wakwani, a National Assembly member, being ejected from the Islamabad bound flight. The disgruntled passengers were heard grumbling “Socalled VIPs” and “My foot VIPs” as they waited for the two delayed politicians aboard the aircraft. They were heard talking to PIA crew who seem to be attempting to calm the travellers down. “No, no, no, sir” one of the passengers responded. “We’ve taken it for too long. For 68 years. Are we going to take it for another 68 years?” Then Malik was seen walking towards the plane, only for the passengers to begin shouting at the politician to turn back. “You should be ashamed of yourself...250 passengers have suffered because of you.” Meanwhile, Wakwani was forced out of his seat as people chanted “shame, shame, shame”. As he left the aircraft, most of the 250 passengers applauded. (The Sun, 18-9-2014)

Aceh approves caning for gay sex

BANDA ACEH: Indonesia’s conservative Aceh province passed a law making gay sex punishable by 100 lashes of the cane, in a decision described by rights activists as “an enormous step backwards”. Aceh, the only part of the world’s most populous Muslim majority nation that is allowed to implement Islamic syariah law, already carries out public caning for gambling, drinking alcohol and fraternising with the opposite sex outside of marriage. (Sunday Star, 28-9-2014)

New York gripped by lawyer accused of rape It had been a star-studded night at New York’s Four Seasons hotel. The singer Aretha Franklin gave a speech and the film director Spike Lee read poetry as the city’s political elite ate oysters and red velvet layer cake – all to celebrate the 60th birthday of the civil rights activist Reverend Al Sharpton. As the party wound down, Sharpton’s old friend, Sanford Rubenstein, one of America’s most prominent civil rights lawyers, was spotted leaving the hotel with a woman on each arm. The smooth-talking 70-year-old had invited them back to his Manhattan penthouse for an after – party drink. What happened next is now the subject of an investigation by the New York district attorney’s office – and a scandal that has gripped the country. Two days after Sharpton’s party on October 1, Rubenstein was accused of rape by one of the two women, a 42-year-old mother of two from Brooklyn. The alleged victim, a senior executive in a large retail chain and a prominent volunteer with Sharpton’s National Action Network, has reportedly been tested to see if she was drugged before being subjected to a sexual assault. Rubenstein, however, insists they had consensual sex. “During the course of the night, for whatever reason, things seemed to get foggy and she blacked out, due to what, at this point, we don’t know,” said Kenneth Montgomery, the woman’s lawyer.

(The Sunday Times, 12-10-2014)

Indonesian officials ordered to pay for second wife

MATARAM (Indonesia): An Indonesian district has ordered male civil servants to pay US$80 (RM261) to marry a second wife to crack down on polygamy, officials said, but activitists criticised it as a “crazy” bid to profit from the practice. Male officials in the world’s most populous Muslimmajority country were already required to get written permission from their superiors if they wanted a second wife. Male civil servants are required to pay the fee – a large amount for the average Indonesian – for each new marriage after their first. Polygamy is technically legal in the country of 250 million people, but only when the husband registers his marriages and receives the consent of his other wives. (The Star, 16-10-2014)

Murders spark backlash on expats Western bankers accused of treating Hong Kong as personal playground HONG KONG: The murder of two young Indonesian women in Hong Kong allegedly by a British expatriate has sparked a backlash against wealthy Western bankers accused of treating the financial hub as their own personal playground. The victims were found mutilated in 29-year-old Rurik Jutting’s upmarket apartment in Wanchai, streets away from the neon-lit bars of the neighbourhoods’s famous red-light district – popular with expats and tourists at all hours. A lot of losers from the West think they are ‘God’ once they come to Asia. Too bad they give all Western expats a bad reputation,” said one response to a news story of Jutting’s arrest posted online. “Some expats get to Asia and develop a huge ego and superiority complex, thinking they are above the law, doing things they would never consider in their home countries,” said another. (The Star, 10-11-2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

‘Driverless’ lorry convoys will be on UK roads next year COMPUTERISED lorry convoys which are controlled by just one driver are set to be tested on British roads next year. The lorries would be electronically linked together, meaning the driver of the front vehicle could control the acceleration, braking and steering of the others. It would allow whole ‘road trains’ of lorries to travel long distances on motorways with only a few yards between each vehicle. While the other lorries in the line would still have dedicated drivers, the automated system would allow them to ‘switch off’ for most of the journey.

(Daily Mail, 18-8-2014)

Stress at work ‘raises diabetes risk by 45%’

OVERDOING it at work is bound to make you tired, grumpy and stressed. But research suggests it could also significantly increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes – even if you’re not overweight. A major study has found that those under the most strain at work are 45 per cent more likely to fall ill with the condition, which increases the risk of heart disease, strokes, blindness and amputations. Some three million people in the UK are currently affected by the disease, but if trends continue this could rise to four million by 2025 and five million by 2030, with type 2 accounting for 90 per cent of cases. The study, from the Institute of Epidemiology in Munich, followed 5,337 men and women aged between 29 and 66 who were in full-time work. Over a 12-year period, nearly 300 of the subjects – who were previously healthy – developed type 2 diabetes. (Daily Mail, 18-8-2014)

Caned by wife for refusing sex Abused husband who has scars on legs and buttocks seeks NGO’s help. A woman from Klang turns violent and will hit her husband with a cane whenever he is not able to meet her sexual needs, China Press reported. And, she wants it every day! The woman also forced her husband to drink aphrodisiac products to enhance his sexual prowess so he could meet her demands. The man, who married the woman two years ago, had thought of lodging a police report several times, but did not as he still loved his wife. (The Star, 14-6-2014)

Jayalalithaa found Guilty Tamil Nadu CM convicted of graft in case that dragged on for two decades NEW DELHI: An Indian special court convicted Jayalalithaa Jayaram, a former film star turned powerful politician, in a corruption case that has dragged on for nearly two decades. The judge held “Jayalalithaa guilty of amassing wealth disproportionate to known sources of her income and sentenced her to four years jail,” prosecutor G. Bhavani Singh said. Jayalalithaa, the chief minister of Tamil Nadu state, was charged with amasing illegal wealth in 1997, when police seized assets including 28kg of gold, 750 pairs of shoes and more than 10,000 saris in a raid on her home. (Sunday Star, 28-9-2014) Chen Ziming, democracy advocate in China, is dead at 62 The cause was cancer, said Wang Juntao, a fellow dissident who was arrested and sentenced with Mr. Chen. A reform-minded intellectual, Mr Chen had a history of challenging government orthodoxy. He was first sent to prison in 1975 because of letter he had written critizing the Gang of Four, the political faction surrounding Mao Zedong at the end of his life. (International New York Times, 29-10-2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Doubt as a sign of faith Certainty is so often overrated. This is especially the case when it comes to faith, or other imponderables. When the Most Rev. Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, said recently that at times he questioned if God was really there, much of the reaction was predictably juvenile: Even God’s earthly emissary isn’t sure if the whole thing is made up! The International Business Times called it “the doubt of the century.” Archbishop Welby’s admission had not just “raised a few eyebrows,” it declared, but “sparked concerns if the leader of the Church of England would one day renounce Christianity or spirituality as a whole.” Another journalist wrote excitedly, “Atheism is on the rise and it appears as though even those at the top of the church are beginning to have doubts.” Despite the alarm, the archbishop’s remarks were rather tame. He told an audience at Bristol Cathedral that there were moments where he wondered, “Is there a God? Where is God?” Then, asked specifically if he harbored doubts, he responded, “It is a really good question. ... The other day I was praying over something as I was running, and I ended up saying to God, ‘Look, this is all very well, but isn’t it about time you did something, if you’re there?’ Which is probably not what the archbishop of Canterbury should say.” (International New York Times, 26-9-2014)

Singapore Sling – Hits a century! This classic was created in 1915 at the Long Bar of Singapore’s Raffles Hotel and is now famous the world over. Enjoy the Singapore Sling – a concoction of dry gin, Dom Benedictine, orange liqueur and cherry brandy, shaken up with lime and pineapple juices and a dash of Angostura bitters and Grenadine. Ranked a one of the world’s top 10 cocktails, Singapore Sling by True Heritage Brew is now available in an easyto use ready mix for you to enjoy the iconic Singapore cocktail. (Travel Exclusive)

Alcohol in Kerala Saturation point: If the Chief Minister of the southern Indian state of Kerala, Oommen Chandy, has his way, booze will be banned in India’s hardest-drinking state within a decade. He is already getting tough. On September 12th, three days after the alcohol-soaked holiday of Onam, officials will finish shutting down 730 bars in cheaper hotels. They plan to close dozens of liquor shops each year. Mr Chandy can claim a mandate for his zeal, as India’s constitution has long urged state governments to “endeavour to bring about prohibition of…intoxicating drinks”. Still, his initiative has come as a shock. (The Economist, 30-8-2014)

Jokowi flies economy class to Singapore

SINGAPORE: Indonesian President Joko Widodo and First Lady Iriana flew economy class into Singapore with a 10-man entourage to attend his youngest childs’ graduation ceremony at the Anglo Chinese School (International). The two, accompanied by Indonesia’s ambassador to Singapore Andri Hadi, proudly watched their youngest son Kaesang Pangarep, 19, go onstage on Friday evening to receive his International Baccalaureate diploma at ACSI. (Sunday Star, 23-11-2014)

Ban on Veils Approved In Restive Western China BEIJING-Authorities in Urumqi, the capital of China’s western Xinjiang region, approved a legal ban against women wearing face-covering veils in public, as part of a crack-down on conservative Islamic dress following several deadly attacks blamed on separatists and religious extremists. Police in many parts of Xinjiang have already tried to enforce informal restrictions on women wearing burqas and other types of fullveils, which Chinese officials say are symptoms of the spread of radical Islam among the region’s mostly Muslim Uighur ethnic group. (The Wall Street Journal, 14-12-2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

ANNUAL PROFILE OF MEMBERS OF THE BAR Year 2013 A.

Breakdown according to sex (as at 31 Dec 2013) Gender

Number

% (of total Members)

Female

7977

Male

7717

Total

15694

100

Breakdown according to age (as at 31 Dec 2013) Age

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

21 to 30

4200

2907

1293

31 to 40

4419

2513

1906

41 to 50

4130

1927

2203

51 to 60

1830

500

1330

60 and above

1115

130

985

Total

15694

100

7977

7717

Breakdown according to ethnicity (as at 31 Dec 2013) Ethnicity

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

Malay

6359

3697

23.5

2662

Chinese

5964

2967

2997

Indian

2744

1091

1653

10.5

Punjabi

479

152

327

Eurasian

0.9

0.05

Other

137

0.1

0.4

0.5

Total

15694

100

7977

50.95

7717

49.05

Breakdown according to number of years since admission to practice (as at 31 Dec 2013) Years since admission

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

0 to 3

3697

2464

1233

4 to 7

2088

1318

8.5

770

8 to 12

2489

1331

8.5

1158

13 to 20

4737

2094

2643

more than 20

2683

770

1913

Total

15694

100

7977

7717

Note: There may be minor inconsistencies in the percentages due to rounding Prepared by: Ruhil Amal Abdul Razak and Chin Oy Sim (8 Aug 2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

Year 2012 A.

Breakdown according to sex (as at 26 June 2012) Gender

Number

% (of total Members)

Male

7260

Female

7082

Total

14342

100

Breakdown according to age (as at 26 June 2012) Age

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

21 to 30

3198

2266

932

31 to 40

4534

2485

2049

41 to 50

3836

1761

2075

51 to 60

1753

458

1295

60 and above

1021

112

909

Total

14342

100Â

7082

7260

Breakdown according to ethnicity (as at 26 June 2012) Ethnicity

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

Malay

5703

3213

22.8

2490

17.5

Chinese

5389

2630

2759

19.5

Indian

2617

1012

1605

Eurasian

0.1

0.05

Other

138

0.9

0.5

Punjabi

485

155

330

2.5

Total

14342

100

7082

7260

Breakdown according to number of years since admission to practice (as at 26 June 2012) Years since admission

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

0 to 3

2070

1413

657

4 to 7

2171

1391

780

8 to 12

2544

1368

1176

13 to 20

4825

2131

2694

more than 20

2732

779

1953

Total

14342

100

7082

7260

Note: There may be minor inconsistencies in the percentages due to rounding Prepared by Chin Oy Sim and Ruhil Razak (26 June 2012) (updated 8 Aug 2014)

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

Year 2011 A.

Breakdown according to gender (as at 12 Aug 2011) Gender

Number

% (of total Members)

Male

7074

Female

6614

Total

13688

100

Breakdown according to age (as at 12 Aug 2011) Age

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

21 to 30

2816

1969

847

31 to 40

4787

2589

2198

41 to 50

3527

1556

1971

51 to 60

1634

408

1228

60 and above

924

830

Total

13688

100

6614

7074

Breakdown according to ethnicity (as at 12 Aug 2011) Ethnicity

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

Malay

5394

2967

21.5

2427

Chinese

5155

2472

2683

Indian

2527

960

1567

11.5

Eurasian

0.1

0.02

0.04

Other

126

0.9

0.5

Punjabi

478

150

328

Total

13688

100

6614

48.02

7074

52.04

Breakdown according to number of years since admission to practice (as at 12 Aug 2011) Years since admission

Total Members

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Female)

% (of total Members)

No of Members (Male)

% (of total Members)

0 to 3

2499

1680

819

4 to 7

1953

1183

770

8 to 12

2944

1443

1501

13 to 20

4197

1785

2412

more than 20

2095

523

1572

Total

13688

100

6614

7074

Note: There may be minor inconsistencies in the percentages due to rounding Prepared by: Chin Oy Sim and Ruhil Razak (12 Aug 2011)

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

BAR POSTAL ELECTIONS 2014 – S. Balarajah The results of the Bar postal elections pursuant to S.50 of the LPA were announced on 2.12.2014 and those elected to office are the 12 members below. No significant changes in the elected ones. And no change in the attitude of members in their apathy indifference and the “who cares” attitude surprisingly emanating from members this honorable and ancient profession of learned men (and this embraces women) in not returning the ballot. S. Balarajah

A total of 15926 ballots were issued by the Bar Council. The number of returned ballots were a miserable 3372. It is just over 21%. So it works out that a miserable 21% of the total ballots given out to the general body of the Bar are returned. The Bar elects as Christ chose 12 Apostles, 12 of its peers by postal votes to rule and govern its members in the ensuing year. A total of 23 candidates stood for the 12 seats elected by postal ballots in the Council of 38 members. Do study the figures and the reasons for some ballots having been excluded: Total number of ballots issued: 15926 Total number of ballots received: 3372 Number of ballots where members were ineligible to vote: 11 Number of spoilt ballots : 13 Total number of valid ballots: 3348 This works it to be 21.02% of members casting their votes. Members of the Bar urge for fair and free elections for nations. For the peoples of the world. We urge for universal suffrage. We fight for rights. We fight against wrongs. But to ourselves and our regime we appear rather lackadaisical. Just as one wise one asked how many of us lawyers have written their own Last Wills and Testaments? We take care of the affairs of the others but our own are place in the back burner. It appears that there was some hoo-ha over the vote counting exercise this time around. One remembers Joseph Stalin who said it: “It is enough that the people know that there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who counts the votes decide everything.” Have we forsaken our rights to elect? To cast our ballots? To exercise our privilege and statutory rights? If it is too much of a bother to cast postal votes should we now think of Internet or online voting? Will it be subject to abuse? The temptation for a person who is computer savy to check and or disrupt such elections cannot be ruled out. One cannot be certain if electronic voting can be 100% safe and secure. No INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

system is fool proof. Are there ways to prevent electronic fraud? In postal voting the biggest so called “cheating” can happen in a large firm when the person in charge of mail collects all the ballot papers mark them as directed and post them away. Hijacked. So postal voting and online voting can be subject to abuse if people want to abuse and cheat. What more can be done to facilitate fair voting? May be it is some form of indifference and gross disillusionment that are the core reasons of members not being interested to cast their votes. A minimal effort is required and yet not many bother to lift a pen and put their mark and elect their rulers! The objects and powers of the Malaysian Bar are laid out in S.42 of the LPA 1976. Inter alia it has powers to protect and assist the public in all matters touching ancillary on incidental to the Law (S.42) The Bar seems to police good governance and the rule of law but the general body of the Bar appears quite indifferent to its own domestic affairs. Is it because of the confidence of members that whoever is elected will do no wrong. On elevation as a Bar Councilor does one go through a metamorphosis and become a guardian angel of the profession and its members. Whosoever is elected becomes a guardian angel so why bother to return the ballots? So much faith, so much hope and so much confidence. After all it is the organs of the Nation namely the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive who have the task and the monopoly to ensure adherence to the rule of law and the Constitution of the Nation. We take it that they are all mindful of their peculiar tasks and obligations and so do we stand asunder and let the dogs bark whilst the wagons move on? Is postal voting an invitation to fraud? The judge in a vote-rigging trial has criticised the postal voting system as “hopelessly insecure” and “wide open to fraud”. The English High Court judge investigated allegations of vote-rigging in Birmingham’s local elections, and concluded that the city’s Labour party was involved in electoral fraud. Richard Mawrey QC accused the government of being not only complacent, but “in denial”, about the failings of the postal system. One wonders again as to why should or why are members of the learned profession so indifferent to the Bar elections? This is not the first time. All along the return of ballots have been 20 – 25% only. What sort of alarm should be raised? What sort of wake-up is warranted? What kind of pills prayers and principles should we adopt so that the Malaysian Bar can be a profoundly powerful Bar. There seem to be a number of new faces amongst the 11 who did not make it in this election. Well there is always another day. Another time. Hope the fallen 11 are not disheartened or discouraged. Failure is the mother of all success. Do stand to fight another day. A cursory perusal of the List of Advocates and Solicitors in order of seniority will show that the vast majority of our nearly 16000 members are less than 20 years in practice. If only members of the Bar voted in concert they could have changed the face of the Bar and its directions too. For those who did not make it this time, one hopes that they do not envy the preferment of the elected ones. I am sure those elected are all too familiar with our institution its rules and regulations to warrant any misgiving or mistrust and

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

we know that there are enough checks and balances to ensure that they will not exceed the powers with they are vested. It is hoped that they will forever be mindful of the rules and ethics of the Bar touching the welfare of its members and the good government of the institution of the Bar. And we trust that as honorable ones those not elected are too generous a disposition to envy those elected this time. After all, we all should have one aim. For a better Bar. A Bar that lauds Law and Justice. An independent and fearless Bar. As a last special exortation lets remember the poignant words of Rev Martin Luther King: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” The independence, the progress and the high standing of the Bar in society matters and must be deeply entranched in every lawyer’s breast. S. Balarajah Johore Bar 3/12/2014 ELECTED TO BAR COUNCIL ON POSTAL BALLOTS 2014/15

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The Office Pearl By Allen Yu

It is often said that behind every successful man is a woman. Well, behind every successful firm is the office staff. And very often you will find that there is one who is the “pillar of the firm”. That is to say that if you removed that person, the whole firm will collapse or in turmoil. Some firms are luckier than others in having a few pillars. These are the office pearls- very precious.

Allen Yu

I know of a firm where the lawyer after his call to the bar, opened his own firm immediately. He could not have done that without the help of his capable chief clerk. His job was mainly marketing and putting his name of the documents. The Chief Clerk did all the rest of the conveyancing and administrative work. Getting a good staff was very difficult in my early years. Firstly, for a law firm whose clientele were mostly Chinese, I needed a clerk who could speak the three languages- Chinese, Malay and English. And she must also be able to handle the clients. Some clients can be really difficult, to say the least. It is amazing that some clients in their fifties could not converse in Malay at all and will always ask for the Chinese staff to explain things to them. If no Chinese staff is available they will either come another day to speak to the lawyer themselves or seek the services of another law firm. Many referred to previous letters to guide them in their letter writing. They kept sample letters. Others referred to the dictionary or use Google translate. Secondly, law firms required their office staff to have at least some “common sense”. Trouble with common sense is that it is not so common these days. Silly mistakes are often made. I remember one newbie given a letter to “follow as a sample”. She remembered the “follow” part of the instruction but not the “sample”, and typed (before the time of printers) exactly the same words as the sample letter, including the reference number. And when she was given a office letter (the size of a A Form paper) to type a short letter of about 5 lines, she used 5 line spacing for each line, so that (according to her) she can filled up the page. Don’t waste ma.. Another staff when told to photocopy an affidavit for the office file, photocopied everything including the pages marking the exhibits WITHOUT photocopying the exhibits. Hello! What’s going on in there? Another staff did “study the matter” before taking action. However sometimes she seems to be studying with her eyes closed. My own office manager when she first worked for another law firm, would asked the chief clerk of that firm many questions until he asked her whether she was trying to take his place. That should be the way to learn in a law firm and not just wait to be told what to do. Thirdly-typing skills. When I started my law firm in the late 80’s, typing was on its way out. Many young newbies could not type. Every interviewee panicked when asked to take a typing test. One lawyer told me of his funny experience in trying to get a Chinese staff. During the interview he asked her whether she can speak Malay. She replied in Chinese, “Ee Tian Tian” (meaning a little bit). Asked whether she can speak English, again she replied, “Ee Tian Tian”. Asked whether she knows how to type, she replied, “Huh!!” (as in a shock). 62

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

When one newbie was told that my firm did not permit the staff to use “blanko”, she stashed away all her mistakes in her drawer. When she left in a month’s time, she left behind about five reams of paper. I suppose I should have been stricter with her. Some law firms kept all their letterheads and printing paper and record the numbers requested by the staff. I couldn’t do that. Legal documentation is stressful enough without looking over the shoulder to see whether their salaries will be deducted from the wastage. I still have my manual typewriters. They may be worth more than my law firm one day. Fourthly – computer skills. I hired one staff without testing her when she claimed to be computer literate. We were using the wordstar programme then. I discover that she had deleted my entire file at the push of one key. She confessed later that she was not familiar with the programme. Sometimes in an interview it is the interviewee that seems to be doing the decision. On one occasion this interviewee looked up and down my office and asked whether we worked on Saturdays, the expected bonus and pay increment. And in another case the interviewee asked how much is our “food allowance”. Food allowance?? But I had some good ones also. The ones who not only do their work well and independently but also handle the clientele very well. Many of these office pearls were referred as the “lawyer-buroks” of the office- para legals. Through experience they know the law and procedure well and could explained the law to some clients at their level of education. Fifthly – the ability to follow up. In conveyancing, the time frame in completing each task is important. The clerk must be able to keep in her mind the time frame. Those who waited for their lawyers’ instructions will not see much in pay increment and bonus. I had more than one occasion pay the penalties for late registration due to their oversight. Some lawyers would have deducted the staff’s salary. I did not. Sixthly the ability to get the clients to pay. Sometimes this involved some negotiations and required a lot of patience. These staff members are real pearls in the office because they help in the cash flow of the office. I had one who was that good but unfortunately she decided to follow her daughter to the capital. Compare that to another who seems to relish in filling up payment vouchers and never bother to check whether the clients have paid up. Some law firms pay their staff a nominal salary but will give commission for each piece of work done. This they believed will reward the hardworking ones. I did not practice that. Seventhly, diligence and discipline. It’s about taking pride in their work and hence being professional about it. I was rather relaxed when it comes to employees leave. As long they completed their work, I was not bothered. I suspect emergency leaves have been abused in my office. Come Monday mornings or the day after a long holiday, one of them will always call up to say that they were sick. One of my fellow lawyers said that it should be stated in the employees resume, the number of relatives still surviving, because otherwise the reason for the leave is that their mother or auntie passed away seems to come quite often. Employers should also have access into the employees Facebook account. One lawyer hired a retired government officer only to regret it later. It seems the clerk would hurried back home to do her household chores, something she probably did whilst in government service, before the time of clocking in.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Keeping an office pearl may not be easy if the office environment is hostile to her. It just takes two person to have an office politics. God help the office if their hostilities towards each other affects the office. They will refuse to cover each other work, and self declared their job description as an excuse. Some clerks are not only impolite to their colleagues, clientele and callers to the office but are also argumentative. I experienced one not too long ago when I asked the law firm acting for the petitioner seeking an adjournment to mention on my behalf. The clerk told me to mention on their behalf instead. I told her that it was her duty to find someone to mention as it was their action. She replied that it was my case also and it went on and on until I put down the phone. In the end she got another firm to mention on their behalf only. Another chief clerk would interrogate you before she allows you to talk to her lawyer, a legal assistant. She was particularly concerned with female callers. I suggested to one of the female lawyers to call and when asked the purpose of the call, to say that she was carrying his child. That should knock her off her chair. One senior lawyer from Johor Bahru said my clerk was over friendly with her on the phone calling her on first name basis instead of “Madam or Ms. Not many clerks chose to dress professionally i.e. office attire. Some too casual in jeans. Others too sexy in miniskirt and see through blouses. Perhaps the safest is to dress in the baju kurung. One office boy wore eye liner thicker than the singer, Adam Lambert. My defense or excuse to all my office girls behavior is that my firm is a small firm, catering more to individuals than corporate clients. Hence the more relaxed atmosphere. I have heard of two law firms paying their staff a whole years pay as their bonus. Or perhaps that just an urban legend. But staffs who are motivated only by money are not worth keeping them. The real Office Pearls are those who are also loyal and not easily bought over. One lawyer told me she tried to “persuade” another lawyer’s staff by offering her double her present pay, plus two all paid expenses holiday- one local and one overseas. The clerk turned her down. She is a rare and precious pearl.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The Psychotherapist The ‘Concerned Lawyers’ of the Johore Bar have appointed me Dr Michael Menon to advise the dispirited lawyers of Johore. My doctorate in this field is from the College of Oxford, a medical school in the City of Oxford in USA. Please have no fear as to my expertise. It was obtained in similar fashion as some of my brethren doctorates-in-law viz by correspondence and payment of the requisite hefty fee.

N. Jagatheesan

Here then are some of the problems posed to by our brethren and my advice to them.

1st Problem Dear Dr Menon I am a 34 year old solicitor and do not do any court work. My wife is also 34 years old and she is a very busy advocate but now looks haggard and harassed. I remain very focused on my health and am fit and able. I desire sex everyday but my wife has since the past 3 years refused sex. “I am too tired and exhausted” she says. On the rare occasion when she consents and that too after a lot of begging, only the missionary position is allowed. Please advise.

Advice My dear man to begin with you should have made sure that you both were sexually compatible before marriage. If prior to your marriage your wife had no penchant for a variety of sexual acts of questionable nature, you should not have married her. She was certainly not fit for marriage. On the other hand if the change in her attitude to your marital bliss was really due to her sheer exhaustion of being a busy advocate then you must appreciate that the advent of the KPI i.e. the Key Performance Index is the cause. The KPI was meant to be a set of measures to gauge the performance of the judges with the key objective of administering justice. However our Chief Judge following his great predecessor has imposed this KPI as purely a means to dispose off or get rid of cases as fast as possible. For the judges and lawyers the KPI is the equivalent of Bush’s “Shock & Awe.” Now the judges have to clock in and clock out and their performance is determined solely by how fast they can dispose off cases. Why just look at the present day 30 year old judge or lawyer. They look 50: A 50 year old looks 70: Seriously are there any 70 year old practitioners these days? Regrettably our leaders i.e. the Bar Council has focused their attention on other worldly matters and not this “Shock & Awe.” So you can forget any advice or help from them. You must appreciate that your wife is sadly caught in this KPI whirlpool and finds herself so tossed about that at the end of the day she just wants respite; not sex. So what advice can I give you? You could of course resort to gotong royong or else take advantage of the numerous ‘Hotel California’ which our industrious Han community has established all around our city.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Remember the lyrics “On a dark alleyway, warm smell of coitus rising through the air, I thought I heard them say ‘Welcome to the Hotel California, such a lovely place, such lovely ladies, you can check in anytime but you can never leave without paying.”

On the other hand if ‘Hotel California is not your bag then you have to accept that your marriage is caught in what is called the ‘Macbeth battlefield’ in which “fair is foul and foul is fair.” That being so I can think of no better advice then to quote the wise words of President Fauziah of the ‘Obedient Wives Club’ who said that ‘your wife is your field and you can plough her anyway you like.” 2nd Problem Dear psychotherapist I have been in practice for the past 2 years as a legal assistant for a one man firm. My employer is a lazy old sod like most senior practioners and is in the twilight of his dwindling practice. His command of the Malay language is zilt and I have to translate for him every Malay letter, pleading and notice. This makes me wonder why his citizenship has not been withdrawn by our robust Home Minister under the prevailing political climate. But this is not my problem. It is a mere orbiter. My problem is that I have a Senior Sessions Court Judge who has repeatedly been offensive to me. How can I (as my employer is of no help) deal with this without making a complaint to the Bar committee which I find is really ineffectual?

Advice To begin with I must tell you these days it is seldom that one finds an offensive judge, though in the lower courts this may be some what prevalent.

One must also not forget that some of the remarks by judges may seem offensive but they are really sarcastic wit. I recall one incident (told to me) of the late Justice Tan Sri Eusoffee Abdul Kadir and Mr Sulaiman Navaratnam a loquacious senior lawyer. In a chamber matter Mr Sulaiman did not bring and could not recall certain Rules of the High Court. When the matter was over and just as the lawyers involved were departing, Tan Sri Eusoffee remarked “Mr Sulaiman, Please remember I do not mind if lawyers forget to bring their hankerchief to Court but I do mind if they fail to bring the Rules of the High Court.”

So you must be careful to distinguish between offensiveness and sarcascm or wit. However if the judge in question was really rude or offensive you could try and apply the style of my old master Keith Seller. In the bygone years there was a High Court judge Datuk Tan Sri Syed Othman J (as he then was). Though a very sympathetic judge he had an awful temper and would explode very easily. In one case when he exploded and made a rude remark, Keith Seller replied very loudly “I beg your pardon my Lord, I beg your pardon.” The message appeared to be received and thereafter Syed Othman J. piped down. Now these words “I beg your pardon, I beg your pardon” cannot be said weakly. It has to be said stridently and loudly. So I suggest you memorise and practise these words loudly. See if this helps but if the judge happens to be a lady do not be smart and add words like “perhaps I caught your Ladyship in the wrong period of the month.” That being said, it is true that sometimes we come across offensive or exploding judges. Such judges do however get elevated And when they do they somehow seem to mellow.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

I recall recently there was one such judge who would bellow or erupt like Krakatua for no ostensible reason, every ½ or 1 hour of presiding. Fortunately her ‘KPI assessment’ was good and she got elevated to the Court of Appeal where she now remains dormant. So as the saying goes ‘Nil Desperandum’ i.e. do not despair.

3rd problem “I am a 66 year old spinster. There is a 28 year old magistrate who has openly said to me that he is consumed by waves of desire for my flesh And he wants to marry me. I am thrilled but considering our age should I think about the future and of what might happen in 10 or 20 years.”

Advice There is no need to think of the years ahead. If he dies he dies.

That’s all for the moment. Meanwhile I append some cartoons to relief your stressed souls. Your friendly neighbourhood psychotherapist James Menon By N. Jagatheesan LIGGER

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

An Introduction to Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Part 2] By Yang Pei-Keng - 22 Sept 2014 15. If a Malaysian has now become a Singapore citizen this year (2014). He bought a property when he was a Malaysian some years ago. What is his tax position if he sells his property now? Example: Originally, I was a Malaysian. 10 years ago, I bought a house in Johore Bahru. I acquired Singapore citizenship in 2014. If I sell my house now, do I have to pay any real property gains tax? Yes. That is because you are selling your property as a Singaporean – a non-citizen. Since you are selling it more than 5 years after you had bought it, you have to pay at least 5% RPGT. Once you have acquired Singapore citizenship, you are no longer a Malaysian, but a non-citizen. Therefore, you cannot enjoy the benefits of a citizen. You have to pay the RPGT rates payable by a non-citizen. The fact that you were once a Malaysian is irrelevant.

16. What is the difference between the rates of gains tax payable by a citizen and those payable by a non-citizen? The following schedule will show the difference in the rates of RPGT payable by a citizen and a non-citizen: Schedule of Rates of RPGT (citizen/non-citizen) as at 1.1. 2014 Disposal by

year 1

year 2

year 3

year 4

year 5

year 6…

citizen

30%

20%

15%

non-citizen

30%

Note: (1) For a Malaysian citizen, a sliding scale of RPGT [ranging from 30%, 20%, 15% to 0%] is payable for any gain upon the disposal of any property. (2) If a citizen sells his real property after keeping it for more than 5 years (say 6 years) no RPGT is payable. (3) A non-citizen [e.g. a Singaporean] has to pay a flat rate of 30% throughout the first 5 years of his acquiring the property. Even if he has kept the property for more than 5 years (say 10 or 15 years), he still has to pay at least 5% of the gain.

17. In the matter of RPGT, what advice would you give if I intend to become a Singapore citizen? Example: I am a Malaysian. I bought a shophouse in Kuala Lumpur 6 years ago in 2010. I intend to become a Singapore citizen soon. What would you advise about the disposal of the property? Once you have become a Singapore citizen, you are no longer a Malaysian citizen. You will be at a disadvantage tax-wise if you sell your property AFTER becoming a Singapore citizen. You will have to pay much higher rates of RPGT.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

You are always liable to pay 5% gains tax after the first 5 years of the purchase. (Within the first 5 years you have to pay a flat rate of 30%) The rates of RPGT payable by you depend on your status of citizenship at the time of the sale (and not at the time of your purchase) of the shophouse. The fact that you were once a Malaysian is irrelevant. Your Malaysian citizenship at the time of purchase is irrelevant. If you remain as a Malaysian, you do not have to pay any RPGT at all after 5 years of your purchase of the shophouse. It is therefore advisable for you to sell off the shophouse before you become a foreign citizen. This is because, as a Malaysian citizen, you do not have to pay any gains tax at all after 5 years of your purchase of the property.

18. What is the position of a Malaysian who has become a permanent resident of a foreign country? Example: I am a Malaysian, but I have become a Singapore permanent resident, working in Singapore. Does it affect my right as a Malaysian so far as RPGT is concerned if I sell my house? No. As a Malaysian, your right [so far as gains tax is concerned] is not adversely affected by your becoming a permanent resident of any country. Reason: You are still a Malaysian. Your status as a Singapore permanent resident does not affect your Malaysian citizenship. Therefore, you still enjoy your right of a Malaysian citizen.

19. How much of the purchase price is to be retained and remitted to the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) under the current RPGT Act? The buyer is to retain 2% of the purchase price to be remitted to IRB: s 21B as amended. It has to be remitted to the IRB within 60 days of the date of sale and purchase of the property. If the buyer fails to remit the 2% retention sum in time, the IRB will impose 10% penalty for such delay. But IRB may grant extension of time for remitting the sum: proviso to s21B as amended by the Finance Act (No.2) Act 2010: s46]. IRB may, in his discretion for any good cause shown, reduce the increased amount: s21B(4). Example : If the selling price is RM1 million, the buyer must send RM20,000 to IRB (i.e. RM1000,000 x 2% = RM20,000) within 60 days of the sale and purchase. If the retention sum of RM20,000 is not remitted to the IRB in time, 10% penalty will be imposed. The penalty amounts to RM2,000 (i.e. 20,000 x 10% = RM2,000). [Note: Before the 2010 amendment, 5% of the purchase price is to be retained as retention sum for RPGT, until the issuance of Certificate of Clearance by IRB. It is no longer law for the seller to keep 5% retention sum: s21B as amended.]

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

20.

Who is to hold the 2% retention sum for RPGT?

In law, the buyer is to retain 2% retention sum [see s21B]. When should the 2% be deducted from the purchase price? It is advisable to deduct it from the 10% deposit paid when the sale and purchase agreement is signed. The agreement may provide for this.

21. Client money exceeding RM5000 - effect of the Solicitors’ Accounts (Deposit Interest) Rules 1990, rule 2(1) Under the Solicitors’ Accounts (Deposit Interest) Rules 1990, when a solicitor holds money exceeding RM5,000 [say, RM6,000], for his client, he is to deposit such money by way of fixed deposit in a bank, and he has to account to the client for any interest earned thereon: rule 2(1). But the solicitor is entitled to charge a fair and reasonable fee for attending to the matter of depositing the retention sum by way of fixed deposit in the bank account. Such fee is to be fair and reasonable: rule 3. Note: (1) The general rule that interest accrued is payable to the client only applies if the retention sum exceeds RM5000. It follows that if the retention sum does not exceed RM5000, the solicitor need not pay any interest to his client. (2) Exception: Any payment made within 4 months, no interest is payable. For example, any retention sum paid out within 4 months for the purpose of paying stamp duty, registration fee etc., no interest is payable on such sum. The amount of retention sum is irrelevant. So long as it is paid out within 4 months, no interest is payable. Since the 2% retention sum for RPGT must be remitted to the IRB within 60 days of the sale and purchase (such payment is to be made well within the period of 4 months) no interest is therefore payable. To summarise: (1) More than RM5,000 to be paid out after 4 months  interest is payable (2) Any money paid out within 4 months ---> no interest is payable

22. If the Valuation Office has assessed the value of any property more than the actual selling price, does it affect the amount of gains tax payable? Example: I bought a dwelling house in 2010 at the price of RM300,000. I was then cash-strapped because of the economic downturn. I had to sell it at a loss, say at RM250,000 (i.e. a loss of RM50,000). But the Valuation Office valued it at RM400,000 (i.e. at a higher price). Is there any gains tax payable by me? Generally, if you are not making any gain in the disposal of the property, no RPGT is payable. But in this case, you may have to pay gains tax since the Valuation Office has valued the property higher than the actual selling price, even though you sold the property at a loss. This is an exceptional case. The actual selling price [RM250,000] was in fact lower than your purchase price [RM300,000] paid some years ago. Instead of making a gain, you had in fact suffered a loss of RM50,000. The IRB may treat the market value of the property as assessed by the Valuation Office as the disposal price (RM400,000) for purposes of computing gains tax.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Such law has been in force since 23 October 1981 [see s14(f) Act 264]. The actual selling price will be ignored. Though you have suffered a loss, you may be requested to pay gains tax.

23. Is there any remedy available? Yes. There is a remedy available to you. The IRB may accept your explanation. You may make an appeal and seek an appointment with the IRB Officer concerned (or with the Head of the RPGT Division), to give your reasons for selling the property at a loss. Explain to the officer the undue financial difficulty and hardship you have undergone, and request for a review [re-assessment] of the gains tax payable by you, since it is a genuine case of disposal at a loss. It is advisable for you to bring along with you whatever evidence you have to substantiate your claim. The Inland Revenue Board may consider your appeal and take the actual selling price [250,000] as the disposal price. The gains tax may be waived. There were cases where gains tax had been waived because of the satisfactory explanation given by the aggrieved party. Some years ago, the property prices were falling in the midst of an economic recession. The Valuation Office was then more inclined to accept the actual selling price as the market value of the property. In one case, a seller needed money to tide over his financial difficulties. So he had to sell his property at a loss because of the economic downturn. But the market price as assessed by the Valuation Office was higher than the actual selling price. He was required to pay gains tax on the so-called ‘gain’ as assessed by the RPGT office, when in fact he had suffered a loss. He was advised to approach the RPGT officer for a review of his case. In the end, his case was re-assessed in the light of his special circumstances, and the gains tax payable by him was waived. ### Yang Pei Keng 22 - 9 – 2014 Johor Bar

City of Johor Bahru

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

8th JOHORE BAR FUTSAL TOURNAMENT 2014 AT C.T. CAFÉ & SPORTS ARENA ON 17th MAY 2014 The first activity of the year – 8 th edition of Annual Futsal Tournament was held on 17 May 2014 at City Café Arena Sport, City Plaza with participation of 8 groups. The event was attended by 80 supporters along with the futsal players. The Challenge trophy for the year of 2014 was won by the Courts after a tough battle given by the former champion, M/s Othman Hashim. As a sign of norm, the event was concluded with a prize giving ceremony headed by the Johore Bar Chairman, Mr. Jayabalan & Sports Committee Chairperson & Deputy Chair, Mr. Hardip Singh and Mr. Mathews George, followed by luncheon.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON CONVEYANCING PRACTICE AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS The CPD Sub-Committee of the Johore Bar organised a seminar that was conducted by Mr. Yang Pei Keng at two places on two different dates. First seminar was held at the Johore Bar Auditorium on the 20th May 2014 and the other took place at Muar Traders Hotel on 5th June 2014. Both focused on various aspects of conveyancing practice including RPGT issues, stamp duty procedure, guidelines and recent developments. The seminar started around 9.30 am after the registration of the participants and ended at about 1.30 pm at both places. The total participants in Johor Bahru were 91 persons and Muar had 36 persons. The seminar ended with a token of appreciation to Mr. Yang Pei Keng.

20TH MAY 2014 AT JOHOR BAR AUDITORIUM

5TH JUNE 2014 AT MUAR TRADERS HOTEL

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

WORKSHOP : “BE A TECH SAVVY LAWYER” HELD ON 29TH MAY 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM Mr. Fadhil Ihsan conducted the workshop on 29th May 2014 at Johore Bar Auditorium. He is well-known for carrying out trainings and consultancy for government agencies and professionals under a wide array of IT topics. The total attendees for this workshop were 19 people. The workshop was held to teach lawyers incorporate technology into their work process and office management. They were exposed to open source tools available on the internet to integrate technology into their practice and were also given demonstration on the use of free tools to create knowledge banks, documents backup, paperless office and even on maintaining accounts. The workshop ended at about 5.30pm with a small token of appreciation presented to Mr. Fadhil.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON ISLAMIC FINANCE: REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ON 10TH JUNE 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM

Mr Megat Hizaini Hassan, a partner in Messrs Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill, conducted a seminar on 10th of June 2014 at the Johore Bar Auditorium. Related topics discussed were Shariah compliance and Shariah regulators, frame work of Islamic banking and framework of Islamic capital markets. There were 65 participants. The seminar started at 2.00pm and ended at about 5.30 pm.

SEMINAR ON PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION ACT 2010 AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON 20TH JUNE 2014 AT THE JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM

On 20th June 2014, Mr Raphael Tay, a member of the KL bar, presented the seminar at the Johore Bar Auditorium, attended by 75 attendees. The seminar explored on Privacy and Confidentiality laws in Malaysia, Introduction to the Act, Unlawful collection of personal data and its offences, Registration of data users, Implications of the Act on business operations, How to comply with the Act, Lawyer’s obligations to comply with the Act and consequences of non-compliance and Comparison with other jurisdictions, and foreign precedents.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON EMPLOYMENT LAW HELD ON 21ST JULY 2014 AT THE JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM The seminar was presented by Ms. Suganthi Singam focusing on Termination of the Employment Relationship and Minimum Retirement Age Act 2012. The seminar started off with the registration of members at 1.30pm and it ended around 5.30pm. A token of appreciation was given to Ms Suganthi by the Chairman, Mr R. Jayabalan. The seminar was attended by 40 persons.

SEMINAR ON AN INTRODUCTION TO MOTOR INSURANCE PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM HELD ON 8TH SEPTEMBER 2014 AT THE JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM

The seminar was presented by Mr Ravin Singh, covering topics on Motor Policies, Exclusions / Extensions, Duty of Disclosure, Accident Claims and Basic Do’s and Dont’s. There were a total of 46 persons attended the seminar.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Professional Standard Course held on 5th & 6th August 2014 at the Johore Bar Auditorium The 2 days Professional Standard Course was held on the 5th and 6th of August 2014 at the Johore Bar Auditorium. There were 22 pupils in total, including the outstation pupils from Melaka, Kuantan and Kota Bharu. On the first day, there were lectures on different topics by Pn Shahareen, Mr Edwin, Mr K. Mohan, Mr S. Balarajah, Mr R. Jayabalan and Ms Tay Bee Choo. The lectures started at 9.00am and ended at 5.30pm. The second day morning kicked off with a challenging 3 hours exam for the pupils and in the evening, there was a dinner arranged at the Berjaya Waterfront Hotel. The dinner was attended by judges, speakers, masters and members. The guest speaker was Dato Yeo Yang Poh.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

Pictures at Professional Standard Course Dinner held on 6th of August 2014 at Berjaya Waterfront Hotel

Guest Speaker Dato Yeo Yang Poh

The VIPs

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) Training on 16 & 17 August 2014 at Johore Bar Auditorium A two-day training session has been organized to guide and assist our members who are participating in the YBGK. The Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) is a comprehensive scheme that funds lawyers to do legal aid work in criminal matters. YBGK was launched by the Prime Minister on 25 February 2011 and commenced operations on 2 April 2012. The training session was attended by 40 persons.

Workshop on Billing & Collections on 27 August 2014 At Muar Traders Hotel, Muar Johor The Continuing Professional Development Committee of the Johore Bar in collaboration with the Bar Council Professional Indemnity Insurance Committee organized a workshop on Billing & Collections at Muar, Johor. The workshop provided training on managing cash flow, billing “how to‘s”, tracking, systems, fee agreements, managing client expectation and ethical billing. The speakers were Mr. Tony Woon and Mr. Jaspal Singh Gill. The workshop was attended by 34 persons.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

WORKSHOP ON SOLICITORS’ REMUNERATION ORDER 2005 HELD ON 21ST AUGUST 2014 AT THE JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM A seminar to provide guidance on the provisions of the SRO was conducted by Mr. Andrew Wong on 21 August 2014 in the Johore Bar Auditorium. The workshop was very interactive, with a total of 46 participants in groups. The workshop started off with registration at 1.30pm and ended at 6pm.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON THE FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPANY LAW HELD ON 5TH SEPTEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM The seminar was conducted by a member of the KL Bar, Mr Tan Kim Soon. There were 80 participants attended the seminar. The main focus of the seminar was on the fundamentals issues of company law that are relevant to both experienced and budding practitioners. The seminar started with the registration of the attendees at 2.00pm and ended at 6.30pm with a small token of appreciation given to Mr Tan Kim Soon.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, TAX AUDIT AND INVESTIGATION ON 23RD SEPTEMBER 2014 AT BERJAYA WATERFRONT HOTEL, JOHOR BAHRU

On 23rd September 2014, the CPD Committee organised a Seminar on GST at Berjaya Waterfront Hotel, Johor Bahru. 200 persons attended the seminar. The speakers were Datuk Harjit Singh and Chong Kean Huat from HSS Advisory, Tax Advisors.

Briefing Session on E-Filing and E-Service Systems at the Industrial Court On 16th October 2014 the Chairman of the Industrial Court, Johor Bahru YA Tuan Roslan bin Mat Nor briefed members of the Bar on the implementation of the E-Filing and E-Service systems at the Industrial Court held at the Johore Bar Auditorium.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

CHAIRMAN’S SPEECH AT WELCOME HI-TEA IN HONOUR OF YA DATO’ MAT ZARA’AI BIN ALIAS, JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER OF THE JOHOR BAHRU HIGH COURT AT THISTLE HOTEL JOHOR BAHRU ON 24th SEPTEMBER 2014 The Honourable Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the High Court in Johor Bahru, Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak, Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng, Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan Muniandy, Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai Bin Alias Puan Rohani Binti Ismail, Sessions Judge and Director of Courts Johor, And fellow members of the Bar, A very good evening to all of you. We are gathered today, for another important event that marks the close relationship between the Bench and the Bar in Johor. It is my pleasure and indeed a privilege, to welcome, on behalf of the Johore Bar, the new Judicial Commissioner to the High Court in Johor Bahru Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai Bin Alias - and to introduce Yang Arif to members of the Johore Bar. There is a popular saying at the Bar that “half of the battle is won when you know the Judge”. That of course is not meant in a sinister way. Neither does it refer to a clandestine affair. It refers to being familiar not only with the law but also with the nature, temperament and personal nuances of a Judge so that you would know the type of Judge that you are appearing before and you could plan on how to handle the Judge. Well, there is also another saying that “a good lawyer knows the law; a clever one takes the judge to lunch” – but that is being naughty and not recommended. Please permit me to say a few words about Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai by way of his introduction. Yang Arif was born on 26 May 1958 in Kuala Kangsar, Perak and read law at Universiti Malaya. Yang Arif’s civil service is as follows. BIL

FROM

UNTIL

1.11.1982

14.8.1985

Assistant Director Legal Aid Bureau Kedah

15.8.1995

31.12.1986

Senior Assistant Registrar High Court Alor Setar

1.1.1987

15.12.1989

Magistrate – Alor Setar

16.2.1989

31.5.1990

Deputy Registrar High Court Kuala Lumpur

1.6.1990

15.1.1991

Sessions Court Judge Kota Bahru

16.1.1991

15.2.1992

Sessions Court Judge Klang

16.2.1992

15.7.1992

Senior Assistant Registrar of the Supreme Court

16.7.1992

30.11.1992

Sessions Court Judge Shah Alam

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

POSITION

1.12.1992

15.7.1994

DPP in Penang

10.

16.7.1994

31.8.1996

Sessions Court Judge Petaling Jaya

11.

1.9.1996

31.8.2001

Registrar of the High Court

12.

1.9.2001

16.10.2005

State Legal Advisor Perlis

13.

17.10.2005

14.8.2006

Ketua Unit Guaman AG’s Chambers

14.

15.8.2006

14.2.2014

State Legal Advisor Pahang

15.

15.2.2014

16.4.2014

Senior Federal Counsel AG’s Chambers

16.

17.4.2014

19.6.2014

Pengerusi Lembaga Penasihat Prime Minister’s Department

17.

20.6.2014

18.

And on 1.7.2014

Appointed as Judicial Commissioner Posted to serve at the High Court in Johor Bahru

Thus far, Yang Arif has served more than 30 years for the nation and in the realm of the laws of our country. When perusing Yang Arif’s service over this period, I noticed that Yang Arif served mostly in the northern regions and was never sent for posting beyond Kuala Lumpur. However, upon being appointed as Judicial Commissioner, Yang Arif was sent to the southern most point of our country – Johor Bahru. Yang Arif’s service was recognised and appreciated with the following awards : i)

Darjah Kebesaran Mahkota Pahang Yang Amat Mulia – Peringkat Pertama - Sri Indera Mahkota Pahang (S.I.M.P)

ii) Darjah Kebesaran Sultan Ahmad Shah Pahang - Yang Amat Mulia – Peringkat Kedua - Darjah Sultan Ahmad Shah Pahang (D.S.A.P) iii) Dato’ Panglima Sirajuddin Jamalullail Perlis - (D.P.S.J) iv) Paduka Mahkota Perak (P.M.P) v) Setia Mahkota Perlis (S.M.P) As I said earlier, Yang Arif commenced duty in Johor Bahru on 1.7.2014. The Johore Bar Committee had met Yang Arif soon upon his arrival, we had introduced ourself and welcomed Yang Arif to Johor Bahru. Unfortunately however we were not able to extend Johore Bar’s customary high tea for new judge to welcome Yang Arif in the presence of our members until today. We are about 3 months delayed now and there some queries amongst members as to why this is not being done. I must apologise for this delay. It was not intentional. We simply could not do this event earlier for respect of the fasting month and the following Hari Raya festive period. Now that the time has come and we are here, on behalf of the Johore Bar, I would like to congratulate Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai for your appointment as Judicial Commissioner and I welcome Yang Arif to Johor Bahru.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The Johore Bar, with 1,757 lawyers is the 3rd largest Bar in this country. We are more than 60 years old now, and we have come to be known as a strong minded Bar that is pro-active, and at times can be less agreeable. However, on the same breath, the Johore Bar is also known for its good rapport with the judiciary and we had always extended a close working relationship with the resident High Court Judges and judicial officers. On this note I pledge the Johore Bar’s fullest support and co-operation to Yang Arif in your heavy task to administer justice in Johor Bahru - in the same manner that we have supported our other High Court judges. We wish for Yang Arif, not only to carry out your task successfully, but also to have an enjoyable stay in this city and for a long and distinguished career on the Bench. I have one more responsibility before I take my seat. And it is a pleasant one as well. The Johore Bar is indeed glad to note that Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng is also with us today. As is known by now, Yang Arif was very recently elevated as His Majesty the King’s Judge and this has come after a long 5 years, I believe, of service as Judicial Commissioner. And may I say, a long wait as well! The elevation must be undoubtedly, a happy occasion for Yang Arif and your family. I take this opportunity to congratulate, on behalf of the Johore Bar on Yang Arif’s elevation and wish Yang Arif to have a long and distinguished career on the Bench. There are certain formalities that has become the tradition of the Johore Bar in honouring a newly elevated Judge and this, with Yang Arif’s permission, I hope can be undertaken soon. Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian, Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng and Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan Muniandy, thank you for joining us today in welcoming your brother judge. I also wish to thank Puan Rohani Binti Ismail, Sessions Judge and the new Director of Courts for Johor for joining us today. This is Puan’s first attendance at Johore Bar event. I hope this can be a pleasant icebreaker for our future working relationship and business meetings. I shall not take longer of your time as we are all eager to hear from the new judge. Fellow members of the Bar, thank you for coming. Thank you for your support to the Committee. Please enjoy your meal. Thank you. R. Jayabalan Chairman Pictures at Welcome High Tea In Honour of YA Dato’ Mat Zara’ai bin Alias on 24 September 2014

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The Johore Bar and Court Games this year was held on 26th & 27th September 2014, and was hosted by Johore Bar. The Courts sponsored the luncheon and closing ceremony with prizes presented to all players participated in the games was held at MSC Cyberport on Saturday 27th. 9 games were played, namely soccer, volleyball, netball, badminton, golf, sepak takraw, table tennis, darts and carrom. Johore Bar again emerged as winner. The Judgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Trophy again being kept by the Johore Bar!

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON BANKRUPTCY – THE LAW & ITS EFFECTS ON 8TH OCTOBER 2014 AT MUAR TRADERS HOTEL, MUAR JOHOR & 9TH OCTOBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM, JOHOR BAHRU The CPD Committee organised Seminar on Bankruptcy – The Law & Its Effects on 8th October 2014 at Muar Traders Hotel, Johor and 9th October 2014 at Johor Bahru. The seminar covered the role of the Debtors, the Creditors and the DGI from the date of the Receiving & Adjudication Orders until the release of bankruptcy. The speaker was Ms. Tejindarpal Kaur.

TALK ON CUSTODY BATTLES IN CONVERSION CASES AT CIVIL AND SYARIAH COURTS HELD ON 5TH NOVEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM On 5th November 2014 the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a free admission talk for members on Custody Battles in Conversion Cases at Civil and Syariah Courts presented by Ms. Pushpa Ratnam and Hj. Azmi bin Tan Sri Dr Rais. Fifty three members attended the interesting seminar.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

9TH JOHORE BAR vs LAW SOCIETY SINGAPORE GAMES 2014 AND DINNER HELD AT PULAI SPRING RESORT, JOHOR ON 11TH OCTOBER 2014

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Farewell Dinner In Honour of YA Dato’ Abdul Rahman bin Sebli and YA Datuk Samsudin bin Hassan on 27th October 2014 at Puteri Pacific Hotel, Johor Bahru

The Social Sub Committee organised a joint farewell dinner in honour of the High Court Judges YA Dato’ Abdul Rahman bin Sebli and YA Datuk Samsudin bin Hassan on 27th October 2014 at Puteri Pacific Hotel, Johor Bahru. The dinner was attended by 60 members to show our appreciation of the Judges contribution during their tenure of service in Johor Bahru. YA Dato’ Abdul Rahman bin Sebli has been elevated to the Court of Appeal on 15th September 2014. YA Datuk Samsudin bin Hassan will be transferred to the High Court in Ipoh commencing from 1st November 2014.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SPEECH BY CHAIRMAN OF JOHORE BAR AT FAREWELL DINNER IN HONOUR OF YA DATO’ ABDUL RAHMAN BIN SEBLI AND YA DATUK SAMSUDIN BIN HASSAN The distinguished guests of honour, Yang Arif Dato’ Abdul Rahman Bin Sebli Yang Arif Datuk Samsudin Bin Hassan (with spouse Datin Nor Aishah binti Khalid) The Honourable Judges and Judicial Commissioners Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak (with spouse Datin Norhuda binti Hussain) Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng

R. Jayabalan

Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan Muniandy YA Dr Sabirin Bin Ja’afar The Honourable Chairman of the Industrial Court Johor Bahru, YA Tuan Roslan bin Mat Nor Tuan Haldar, Sessions Judge representing the Director of Courts Johor Pn Rohani Ismail The Honourable Dato’ Ishak bin Sahari Johore State Legal Advisor And my fellow members of the Bar, A very good evening to you. On behalf of the Johore Bar, I extend to you a warm welcome to this farewell dinner that is hosted in honour of Yang Arif Dato’ Abdul Rahman and Yang Arif Datuk Samsudin. Yang Arif Dato’ Abdul Rahman, was our High Court Judge here until recently, when he was not only, transferred but also elevated to the Court of Appeal on 15.9.2014. Technically, YA has already left us more than a month ago. However due to unforeseen circumstances, the Johore Bar was not able to extend our customary farewell dinner before YA left Johore. I must say that YA has slipped past us. However, the Johore Bar Committee ‘never took our eyes off the ball’. We have monitored YA’s movement and when we found out last week that YA has come back to town for a part heard, we ambushed YA in his chambers and put forward our case for a farewell dinner. YA had kindly agreed provided that it is not too much a trouble for the Johore Bar in view of the short notice. I must say YA, it is never too troublesome for us, it is a tradition of the Johore Bar as a way of showing our respect to the Judge and we are in fact honoured that YA has agreed for the dinner. This is a 2 in one 1 event as we are also hosting this dinner to bid farewell to YA Datuk Samsudin – or more popularly known as ‘Tuan Sam’ amongst lawyers – who will be going on transfer to the High Court in Ipoh from 1.11.2014 – next week! For those who may not be in the know, I would also like to announce that ‘Tuan Sam’ is no longer accurate, it should now be Dato’ Sam. As such I also take this opportunity to congratulate YA on the conferment of Datukship. We share your joy in this YA. Please allow me to say a few words about our two Judges.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

YA Dato’ Abdul Rahman was born on 25.1.1959 in Sibu Sarawak. He graduated from the Universiti Malaya with LLB in 1983. Between 1983-1991, YA served as DPP in Kuching and Kuantan. After a short stint as Sessions Judge in Kota Bharu he served as DPP in KL and Kuching between September 1991-June 1995. Between July 1995-February 1998 YA served as Pegawai Undang-undang Kanan at AG’s Chambers in KL and as DPP in Kuching. From 1.3.1998-December 2002 YA served as Sessions Judge in Kota Kinabalu and Miri and then as Pahang State Legal Advisor between January 2003-August 2006. YA then served as Pengarah, Bahagian Perundangan Jabatan Kastam Diraja between August 2006-September 2008. YA’s call to the Bench arrived on 15.9.2008 when he was appointed as Judicial Commissioner and commenced service at High Court in Kota Kinabalu until August 2010. Upon elevation as a Judge YA continued to serve in Kota Kinabalu before transfer to Shah Alam and later posting to Johor Bahru followed on 2.1.2013. YA served at Johor Bahru until 8.9.2014 when the good news arrived that he is to be promoted to the Court of Appeal. As can be seen, YA has served in Johor Bahru for a duration of close to two years. Although this could be described as a modest duration, I believe I speak for every member here especially those who had the opportunity to appear before YA, that YA has left a lasting impression on us and we will not be forgetting you soon. Lawyers are an observant lot. From our observation, I think we all would agree that if we have a case before YA, punctuality is of utmost importance and must be observed. “Better be in Dato Rahman’s court before 9 – don’t take the risk in his court” – that is the precautionary words amongst JB lawyers. Punctuality has always been important for lawyers in attending court but you know there are times when we lawyers also slack in our timing. It is not encouraged but it happens. I still recall that a few days after YA arrived in Johor Bahru, probably upon eyebrow raised on some JB lawyers’ sense of timing, a yellow colour notice was promptly posted on YA’s court notice board reminding lawyers to come on time with a warning, ‘Mahkamah akan bersidang tepat pukul 9 pagi’ – TEPAT – that is the emphasis. That notice shook things up and soon lawyers knew that 9 pagi must mean what it is – sharp 9 a.m - at Dato Rahman’s court. YA is known to be gentle when hearing cases but can be bold and firm when the need arises in dealing with lawyers. That aside, all of us would agree that YA has given a fair hearing to all lawyers, proper judicial temperament was displayed, hearings went on as scheduled and decisions given on time. We all got to be heard. YA is not one who subscribes to cutting short lawyers nor dismissive of our submissions. It is also widely acknowledged that YA is a man of few words during hearing and on occasions when we wonder whether we are driving the point sufficiently, an occasional remark or query for clarification served to remind us that all points are being heard, considered and we need not worry. YA has been a strong supporter of the Johor Bar programs. He has regularly attended our functions, exchanged ideas and had looked forward to meeting lawyers at our functions. The Johore Bar is indeed grateful to YA for your support during your tenure here. Please allow me now to say a few words about our second guest YA Datuk Samsudin. YA was born on 22.2.1952 and served under Kementerian Luar Negeri before reading law at Ealing College London and completion in 1985.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Between 1986-1989 YA served as DPP in Kuala Lumpur and Terengganu under the AG’s chambers and for the Kastam Diraja. Between 1991-1992 YA completed the Master of Arts in Criminology at the University of Leicester, London. Upon returning, YA served as the Legal Advisor for the Kastam Diraja. In 1994, YA served as the Deputy Registrar of Companies before returning to the Chambers as the AG’s Special Officer in 1997. Between 2000 - 2004 – YA served as the Legal Manager for the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Authority (MTJA). In 2005 – YA took up posting as Senior Federal Counsel at the Law Reform Division then as DPP under the Appeals Unit at the AG’s Chambers. YA’s service at the Bench started in 2008 when YA was appointed as the Industrial Court Chairman and posted to Johor Bahru. On 31.5.2010 – YA was appointed as a Judicial Commissioner – again posted to High Court in Johor bahru. Almost 4 years later, on 18.2.2014, whilst still serving at Johor Bahru, YA was elevated as His Majesty’s Judge of the High Court. I recall that an open court elevation ceremony was held on 30.4.2014 followed by a dinner hosted by Johore Bar for Yang Arif. With all these good things happening in Johor Bahru to YA, it might not be far fetched to say that Johor Bahru has been a charmed place for YA. During Yang Arif’s more than 4 years in Johor Bahru, YA had always been known to be very courteous and understanding in dealing with lawyers. YA may not speak much whilst on the Bench but you have shown that despite the few words, YA’s focus had never wavered and counsel could be rest assured that the Court was always with the parties. YA too has been very supportive of the Johore Bar and is a regular guest at our events. YA has also been a gracious host whenever we knock on your doors. The Johore Bar is indeed grateful for your support. Whilst we are sad to see YA Dato’ Rahman leaving after a relatively short stint in Johor Bahru, we are nevertheless happy to see that YA is sort of leaving us for greener pasture - that is a promotion to the Court of Appeal. On behalf of the Johore Bar, I congratulate YA on your elevation and wish you a long and distinguished career on the Bench. As for YA Dato Samsudin, since your elevation, lawyers especially those who do criminal matters were kind of hoping that you will not be moved away from Johor Bahru. To tell you the truth the news of your transfer generated a noticeable level of disappointment at the criminal bar. I believe I said at your elevation ceremony that we hope for you to stay here for a long time and if we are to organize a farewell for you we hope it would be to wish you well at the Court of Appeal – much like that of YA Dato’ Rahman today. However, that is not to be, and we are bidding you farewell to Ipoh. Our loss is Ipoh’s gain. We hope that the Ipoh lawyers will take good care of you there and we wish for you to have a long and distinguished career at the bench as well. There is another matter that I must put on record. I am indeed happy to inform the members that we have with us a new guest - our new Judicial Commissioner YA Dr Sabirin Bin Ja’afar Yang Arif was posted to Johor Bahru on 14.10.2014 upon appointment as JC and this is Yang Arif’s first appearance at a Johore Bar event. On behalf of the Johore Bar, I would like to take the opportunity here to congratulate Yang Arif on your appointment as Judicial Commissioner and I welcome Yang Arif to Johor Bahru.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

I also pledge the Johore Bar’s full co-operation and assistance to Yang Arif in the administration of justice in Johor bahru. It is the tradition of the Johore bar to officially welcome the new High Court Judge or Judicial Commissioner with a courtesy call and a welcoming hi-tea to introduce the new judge or JC to our members. The Johore Bar Committee have met Yang Arif Dr Sabirin earlier today – we introduced ourself and pledged our support. We will follow this up soon with the customary high tea. We hope that Yang Arif will have an enjoyable tenure in Johor Bahru. The Johore Bar has a good rapport and close working relationship with the Bench more particularly with the High Court Judges here. It is inevitable that problems and complaints do crop out every now and then – that is a fact of court practice – but so far we have been able to resolve these problems cordially and in amicable manner – in view of the good rapport. For this, I wish to thank all the Judges and Judicial Commissioners who are present here tonight for your forwardness, cordiality and responsiveness in engaging the Bar and in appreciating that the Johore Bar Committee has a responsibility to take up problems brought to their attention by members from time to time. On this note, I also wish to record our appreciation to Hakim Utama YA Dato’ Mohd Sofian for his open door policy in engaging with the Bar Committee and willingness to listen to our grouses and take the necessary action, where needed, promptly and appropriately. I hope that this good working relationship will continue for a long time to come. The Bar and the Bench are interdependent in the administration of justice – one cannot exist meaningfully without the other. Dear members, There are many changes taking place as part of the modernization of the management and administration of justice in this country over the last few years. We started with the tracking system, then progressed to e-filing and CRT and the next phase is e-court finance. For members information we have been informed recently that the e-court finance system will be implemented in Johor Bahru courts on 30.10.2014. In fact a briefing on this will be held tomorrow for lawyers. There will likely be some issues in the implementation stage and we hope that this can be resolved amicably and promptly by leveraging on our good working relationship with the courts. To the charming spouse of Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian - Datin Norhuda and the charming spouse of Yang Arif Datuk Samsudin - Datin Nor Aishah – we are indeed privileged to have you with us today. I hope that you will enjoy the evening in the company of our members – and hopefully we have made a good impression of ourself and we hope to see you again in future. To my fellow members, thank you for your attendance tonight. The Bar Committee is grateful for your support. I personally appreciate your presence tonight and humbly apologise for the short notice given to you for this dinner. Your presence tonight shows the respect and regard that we the Bar have for our judges in Johor Bahru. I wish to thank the Social Chairperson Mr Fadhil, his committee members and the secretariat staff for working on extra hours to ensure the success of this event. Dear members and guests, I am fully aware that I stand between you and your dinner. I have taken the stage for some time now. I shall not hold you anymore. Thank you for coming. Good night and enjoy your meal.

R. JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Farewell Speech by YA Datuk Samsudin bin Hassan

Assalamualaikum wbt and very good evening. Yang Berbahagia Saudara / Saudari Pengerusi Majlis. 1. My Brother Judges of the High Court, Johor Bahru, Johor. 2. Yang Berbahagia, Mr R. Jayabalan, Chairman of the Johore Bar Committee. 3. Other Committee Members of the Johore Bar, Senior and Junior Members of the Bar, Dato’-Dato’, Datin-Datin, tuan-tuan and puan- puan sekalian. First and foremost I wish to express my appreciation and many thanks to the Johore Bar Committee under the Chairmanship of Mr. R. Jayabalan to continue organizing a “Farewell” event like this.

YA Datuk Samsudin

Tonight I feel very honoured indeed and strongly believed that all my efforts for the past almost 5 years as Judge of the High Court of Malaya in Johor Bahru as well as in Muar, Johor has been well received and accepted by members of the Johore Bar Committee in particular. Transfer and moving to a new place of work every 4 or 5 years is a normal phenomena for a Judge. Now that I have been asked to move from Johor Bahru, Johor, to Ipoh, Perak i.e. a state where I was born educated and brought up to be a responsible person before moving to Kuala Lumpur and subsequently overseas serving the Malaysian Missions in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and Vienna, Austria. After 5 solid years serving overseas I decided to continue study in law and was very luckily to be offered a Federal Scholarship to enrolled yet again as student at Ealing College London. Throughout my duty as Judge of the High Court in Johor Bahru and in Muar, Johor things that really fascinated me most is the close cooperation between Bar and Bench. I wish to confess here that senior and junior members of the Johore Bar have infact given me tremendous support and full cooperations in the course of discharge my duties ever since I took office as Judicial Commissioner in the High Court of Malaya Johor Bahru. Having good relationship between the Bar and the Bench had actually amicably resolved many an outstanding issues without encroaching the restrictions on the independent of judiciary. I really appreciate that and it will never ever erase from my memory. I really hope the Perak Bar Committee will extend similar gesture to me come 3rd November 2014 when I am supposed to start work at the High Court of Malaya in Ipoh, Perak. Lastly, I would like to thank all advocates and solicitors in Johor for their kind assistances rendered to me throughout my tenure as a High Court Judge here. I also would like to thank present and past chairmen of the Johor Bar State Committee for making this memorable event a success. Best wishes and good luck to all of you. Sekian, dan saya disudahi dengan Wabillah-hitaufik Walhidayah, Wassallamualaikum w.b.t and belated Deepavali as well as Merry Christmas in advance. Datuk Samsudin bin Hassan Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya 27 Oktober 2014

100

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

WORKSHOP ON GETTING STARTED! On Saturday, 1st November 2014, the Continuing Professional Development Sub-Committee of the Johore Bar in collaboration with the Bar Council Professional Indemnity Insurance Committee organised a workshop on Getting Started ! at the Johore Bar Auditorium. The one day workshop covered everything from the fundamentals of legal practice, accounting, taxation, conveyancing to litigation. Thirty five members attended the workshop. The speakers were Cik Rao Suryana bt Abdul Rahman, Mr. Heron Khalid Goh, Mr. Johan Shahar, Cik Mysahra Shawkat, Ms. Karen Cheah and En. Hj. Abdul Murad bin Che Chik.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

101

SEMINAR AN OVERVIEW OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES AND BUSINESSES HELD ON 14TH NOVEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM On 14th November 2014 the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a Seminar An Overview of Sale And Purchase of Shares and Businesses at the Johore Bar Auditorium. The speaker was Ms. Sheba Gumis. Eighty six members attended the seminar. The seminar covered a preliminary overview on the fundamental aspects of transactions involving the sale and purchase of shares and businesses; provide a snapshot view of the process of such transactions, which include negotiations, due diligence, drafting points, completion and post-completion matters. The talk also highlighted the main differences between sales of businesses and sales of shares.

102

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CONTRACT LAW ON 25TH NOVEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM

The CPD Committee organised a seminar on Recent Developments In Contract Law on 25th November 2014 at Johore Bar Auditorium. The seminar was conducted by Mr. Sudhar Thillainathan. 79 persons attended the seminar.

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

103

43rd BENCH & BAR VS POLICE GA MES 2014 21st to 30th November 2014 The 43rd Annual Johor Bench & Bar vs Police Games was held between 21st November 2014 to 30th November 2014. This year had addition games of 12 games were played namely Cricket, Badminton, Netball, Hockey, Table-tennis, Volleyball, Futsal ladies and men, Tennis, Sepak takraw, Golf, Football, Pool & Dart. The Games was jointly officiated by YA Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak as the Senior High Court Judge in Johor Bahru and YDH Dato’ Mohd Mokhtar bin Hj Mohd Shariff, Chief Police Officer of Johor followed by Cricket game as an opening at Johor Cricket Council, Mutiara Rini. The Games ended with a closing ceremony and dinner hosted by the Police held at Dewan Dato’ Onn, IPK on 30th November 2014. The Bench & Bar won volleyball and futsal games whereas the rest of the games won by the Police. The Police team emerged as overall winners. Opening Ceremony & Cricket at Johor Cricket Council, Mutiara Rini

104

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

105

106

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

107

108

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SPEECH BY YA DATO’ MOHD SOFIAN BIN TAN SRI ABD RAZAK DURING THE CLOSING CEREMONY OF THE BENCH & BAR VS POLICE GAMES 2014 ON 30 NOVEMBER 2014

YA HAKIM DAN PESURUHJAYA KEHAKIMAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI JOHOR BAHRU, YDH DCP DATO’ ISMAIL BIN YATIM TIMBALAN KETUA POLIS JOHOR, YBHG EN. R.JAYABALAN, PENGERUSI JAWATANKUASA PEGUAM JOHOR, DATO-DATO, TUAN-TUAN DAN PUAN-PUAN SERTA PARA PESERTA KEJOHANAN. Assalamuaikum w.b.t dan Salam Sejahtera. Syukur Alhamdulilah, dapat kita sama-sama hadir pada malam yang permai ini di Dewan Dato’ Onn, IPK Johor bagi tujuan meraikan upacara Jamuan Makan Malam dan Penutupan Sukan Tahunan diantara Bench/Bar dan Polis Johor, Tahun 2014. Pada tahun ini pihak Polis merupakan pihak penganjur acara sukan tahunan ini dan pada tahun hadapan giliran pihak Bench /Bar pula. Acara sukan ini diadakan pada setiap tahun, tidak syak lagi ialah untuk mengeratkan lagi hubungan siratulrahim diantara ketiga-tiga pihak iaitu pihak Mahkamah, Peguam dan Polis. Ini jelas terbukti INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

109

dengan penglibatan para peserta dari ketiga-tiga pihak mengambil bahagian di dalam 13 acara displin seperti kriket, badminton, hoki, volleyball, futsal(wanita), table-tenis, sepak takraw, tennis, futsal (lelaki), netball, golf, bolasepak dan pool & dart yang bermula pada 21hb November, 2014 sehingga 27hb November, 2014. Ucapara pembukaan dan perasmian sukan ini dihadiri oleh saya dan YDH Senior Commissioner Polis, Dato’ Mohktar bin Mohd Shariff dengan secara simboliknya kami membuat balingan bola kriket menandakan perasmiaan sukan dan kemudiannya disajikan dengan sarapan pagi yang enak oleh pihak Polis. YDH Dato’ Mohktar tidak dapat hadir bersama-sama kita pada malam ini kerana sebab-sebab yang tidak dapat dielakkan. Walau bagaimana pun YDH Dato’ Mohktar telah mewakilkan YDH DCP Dato’ Ismail bin Yatim bagi pihaknya. Saya bersetuju dengan apa yang disarankan oleh YDH Dato’ Ismail didalam ucapan beliau, iaitu acara sukan ini melambangkan bertapa eratnya hubungan diantara ketiga-tiga pihak. Umum mengetahui masing-masing mempunyai masa terluang yang amat terhad di kerana tugas masing-masing tetapi kita semua masih mempunyai ruang dan kesempatan masa untuk mengambil bahagian didalam acara sukan yang dipertandingkan. Pada pendapat saya yang penting bukan semata-mata memburu kejayaan didalam acara yang dipertandingkan, tetapi semangat kesukanan yang jitu lagi tinggi itu lebih penting. Sememangnya didalam mana-mana acara sukan sudah tentu ada yang menang dan kalah tetapi yang ditonjolkan ialah semangat kesukanan tersebut. Menyingkap tirai sejarah sukan tahunan diantara ketiga-tiga pihak ini, ianya bermula pada tuhan 1967 lagi. Untuk tujuan mengeratkan semangat ‘camaraderie’ diantara ketiga-tiga pihak Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi pada ketika itu, Allahyarham Dato’ Ali Hassan telah mencadangkan agar diadakan sukan diantara Mahkamah/Bar dan Polis. Sejak daripada tarikh tersebut sukan tahunan telah berjalan tanpa gagal pada setiap tahun sehinggalah ke hari ini memasuki edisi ke 43. Melihat kepada senarai sukan-sukan yang dipertandingkan, saya ingin mencadangkan agar satu ‘non-competitive game’ iaitu acara menembak diadakan. Saya suka mengambil kesempatan ini untuk mengucapkan tahniah dan syabas kepada para peserta yang mengambil bahagian didalam acara sukan tahunan ini dan kepada yang telah berjaya memenangi acara yang dipertandingkan. Bagi mereka yang kurang bernasib baik, jangan putus asa, insyaallah pada tahun hadapan boleh mencuba lagi. Saya juga ingin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada En. Jayabalan selaku Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Peguam Johor diatas kerjasama yang diberikan didalam penganjuran acara sukan tahunan ini dengan mengalakkan ahli-ahli di kalangan Peguam mengambil bahagian. Saya berdoa agar pada tahun hadapan kita semua akan dapat bertemu semula untuk acara sukan tahunan ini, insyaallah. Saya juga ingin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada pihak Polis selaku penganjur pada tahun ini kerana berjaya menganjur sukan tahunan ini dan mengadakan jamuan makan malam dengan hidangan makanan yang istimewa. Ianya bertambah seri lagi diiringi oleh band Polis serta penyanyinya sekali. Tidak syak lagi peserta-peserta yang mempunyai bakat terpendam boleh mempamerkan bakat dengan menyampaikan lagu-lagu kegemaran mereka. Sekian terima kasih. Saya akhiri dengan lafaz assalamuaikum wbt dan selamat malam!. Bertarikh 30hb November, 2014 Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak Mahkamah Tinggi Johor Bahru

110

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SPEECH BY YDH DATO’ ISMAIL BIN YATIM, TIMBALAN KETUA POLIS JOHOR, DURING CLOSING CEREMONY DINNER BENCH & BAR VS POLICE GAMES ON 30 NOVEMBER 2014

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh dan salam sejahtera dan Salam 1 Malaysia BISMILAHIRAHMAN NIRRAHIM, YANG BERUSAHA SAUDARI PENGACARA MAJLIS, YANG ARIF DATO’ MOHD SOFIAN BIN TAN SRI ABD RAZAK HAKIM UTAMA MAHKAMAH TINGGI JOHOR BAHRU

DCP Dato’ Ismail

YANG DIHORMATI DATO’ RAMLI BIN HASSAN YANG ARIF TUAN GUNALAN MUNIANDY KETUA CAWANGAN KHAS JOHOR PESURUHJAYA KEHAKIMAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI, J.B YANG DIHORMATI DATO’ HASNAN BIN HASSAN YANG ARIF DR SABIRIN BIN JA’AFAR KETUA JABATAN SIASATAN JENAYAH JOHOR PESURUHJAYA KEHAKIMAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI, J.B YANG ARIF DATO’ MAT ZARA’AI BIN ALIAS PESURUHJAYA KEHAKIMAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI JOHOR BAHRU

YANG BERBAHAGIA DATO’ DR HARJIT SINGH PRESIDENT JOHOR CRICKET COUNCIL JOHOR CRICKET ACADEMY

YANG ARIF TUAN TEO SAY ENG PESURUHJAYA KEHAKIMAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI JOHOR BAHRU

YANG BERBAHAGIA MR. R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN JOHOR BAR

Yang Dihormati Ketua-Ketua Jabatan, Ketua Polis Daerah Wilayah Iskandar, Para peserta kejohanan, Seterusnya tuan-tuan dan puan-puan yang dikasihi sekalian. Terlebih dahulu, marilah kita memanjatkan setinggi-tinggi kesyukuran kerana diatas nikmat dan kurnia dari Allah S.W.T maka dapatlah kita bersama-sama berkumpul di dewan ini bagi Majlis Perasmian Penutup Sukan Tahunan Di Antara Bench & Bar Dengan Polis Kontinjen Johor Tahun 2014. Yang Arif, Dato’ – Dato’, Tuan-Tuan dan Puan-Puan yang dihormati sekalian, Saya ingin mengambil kesempatan untuk mengucapkan tahniah kepada Majlis Peguam dan Jawatankuasa Penganjur kerana telah berjaya mengadakan Sukan Tahunan untuk kali ini. Saya difahamkan sebanyak 13 jenis sukan telah dipertandingkan iaitu sukan kriket, hoki, ping pong, bola jaring, badminton, futsal lelaki, futsal wanita, bola tampar wanita, tennis, bola sepak, sepak takraw, golf, pool dan dart. \ Sebagaimana ditahun-tahun lalu, pertandingan pada tahun ini juga telah berjaya dilaksanakan dengan teratur dalam suasana harmoni dan penuh semangat kesukanan. Kejayaan ini merupakan satu bukti wujudnya kerjasama yang erat serta perpaduan dikalangan semua peserta dalam merealisasikan setiap perancangan bagi mencari matlamat yang ditetapkan. Sukan tahunan ini secara tidak langsung mampu mendekatkan hubungan antara PDRM Johor dengan Majlis Peguam melalui sukan dan amalan gaya hidup sihat. Sukan merupakan satu landasan yang baik untuk memupuk dan menyuburkan semangat, persefahaman serta boleh melahirkan individu yang mempunyai minda yang sihat serta fizikal yang cergas.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

111

Yang Arif, Dato’ – Dato’, Tuan-Tuan dan Puan-Puan yang dihormati sekalian, Apabila kita bertanding, bukan sahaja berusaha untuk menang dan merebut pingat tetapi kita juga ingin ‘lari seketika’ daripada persekitaran kerja rutin kita dan merehatkan minda dari tekanan kerja harian. Inilah peluang yang seharusnya digunakan sebaik mungkin untuk menenangkan fikiran, bertemu rakan lama dan baru, berkongsi pengalaman serta bertukar-tukar pendapat. Saya percaya bahawa penganjuran sukan sebegini telah banyak meNyumbang kepada usaha memupuk semangat kerja berpasukan, toleransi dan muhibah di kalangan warga pasukan PDRM dengan Majlis Peguam. Suasana bersukan merangsang kita berkomunikasi dengan satu sama lain dan sama-sama merangka strategi bagi mencapai kemenangan yang pastinya akan memberi kepuasan. Saya berharap agar semangat juang dan kegigihan secara berpasukan yang ditonjolkan oleh para peserta sepanjang berlansungnya kejohanan ini dapat diterapkan dalam budaya kerja harian, samada dalam aspek kerjaya sebagai penguatkuasa atau pengamal undang-undang mahupun untuk menjadi individu yang cermerlang. Yang Arif, Dato’ – Dato’, Tuan-Tuan dan Puan-Puan yang dihormati sekalian, Tamatlah sudah Sukan Tahunan di antara Polis Kontinjen Johor dengan Bench & Bar yang bermula pada 21 November 2014 dan berakhir pada hari 28 November 2014 dengan sukan golf. Sudah menjadi adat bertanding pasti ada yang menang dan ada yang kalah. Yang penting dalam kejohanan seperti ini ialah semangat bertanding secara sihat. Semoga ikatan silaturrahim yang telah terjalin ini tidak sahaja semasa perlawanan tetapi hendaklah pada masa-masa akan datang. Adalah menjadi harapan saya agar kejohanan sukan ini bukan sahaja medan mencungkil bakat-bakat sukan dalam jabatan tetapi juga akan menjadi satu lagi wadah perpaduan seluruh kakitangan Jabatan PDRM Johor dan Majlis Peguam. Kepada pasukan yang menang diucapkan tahniah dan pada yang kalah diharap mencuba lagi ditahun hadapan. Saya juga ingin mengucapkan syabas kepada semua ahli jawatankuasa pengelola dan penganjur serta semua pihak yang telah bertungkus lumus bagi menjayakan kejohanan ini hingga mencapai objektif yang digariskan. Akhirnya, dengan ini saya merasmikan Majlis Perasmian Penutupan SUKAN TAHUNAN DI ANTARA POLIS JOHOR DENGAN BENCH & BAR . Sekian, Wabillahhitaufik Walhidayah, Wassalammualaikum Warahmatullah Hiwabarakatuh Dan Terima Kasih.

112

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

PICTURES AT WELCOMING HIGH-TEA IN HONOUR OF Y.A DR SABIRIN BIN JA’AFAR, JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER OF THE HIGH COURT IN JOHOR BAHRU AT GRAND BLUEWAVE HOTEL, JOHOR BAHRU YA Dr Sabirin bin Ja’afar Judicial Commissioner was transferred to the High Court in Johor Bahru on 13th October 2014. Following the long tradition of the Johore Bar in extending a warm welcome to new judges in Johor, a welcoming high tea was held on 26th November 2014 for His Lordship at Grand BlueWave Hotel Johor Bahru. 60 members attended the high tea.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

113

SPEECH BY MR. R. JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR AT THE WELCOMING HIGH TEA IN HONOUR OF YA DR SABIRIN BIN JA’AFAR, JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER OF HIGH COURT IN JOHOR BAHRU ON 26TH NOVEMBER 2014 The Honourable Judge and Judicial Commissioners of the High Court, Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng, Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan Muniandy, Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai Bin Alias, The Guest of Honour YA Dr Sabirin Ja’afar, Judicial Commissioner of the High Court, Fellow members of the Bar,

R. Jayabalan

A very good evening to all of you and welcome. Yet again, the Bar and Bench of Johor have come together to commemorate another important event - that is to welcome a new member of the High Court Bench - Yang Arif Dr Sabirin Ja’afar who was appointed as Judicial Commissioner on 13th October 2014 and posted to Johor Bahru. Being appointed as a Judicial Commissioner, exercising judicial powers, displaying judicial temperament and ensuring justice to litigants coming before the Courts is a great responsibility. It must be a heavy burden too. Whilst as lawyers sometimes we are tempted to think that being a judge is easy – you just hear the submissions and choose one - we know for a fact that, that is not true. Being a judge is a heavy task, carries great significance and requires plenty of ponderance and evaluation as your decision reaches out of the confines of your courtroom and resonates within the society. For that reason the qualities that are required of a judge are also exceptional. In stating the qualities required of a Judge, the Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association - that represents about 1,000 judges who serve on the superior courts and courts of appeal of Canada, stated : “The judge is “the pillar of our entire justice system,” and the public has a right to demand “virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.” Judges must strive for the highest standards of integrity in both their professional and personal lives. They should be knowledgeable about the law, willing to undertake in-depth legal research, and able to write decisions that are clear and cogent. Their judgment should be sound and they should be able to make informed decisions that will stand up to close scrutiny. Judges should be fair and open-minded, and should appear to be fair and open-minded. They should be good listeners but should be able, when required, to ask questions that get to the heart of the issue before the court. They should be courteous in the courtroom but firm when it is necessary to rein in a rambling lawyer, a disrespectful litigant or an unruly spectator.” We have no doubt that YA Dr Sabirin would meet these qualities and would carry out your judicial responsibility in the most judicious and appropriate manner. In welcoming the new judge, it is customary for the Chairman to formally introduce the Judge to our members and put forward his antecedents. After all, a lawyer must know his judge. YA Dr Sabirin Ja’afar was born in Kampung Ramuan China Besar, Masjid Tanah, Melaka on 16 July 1963. He belongs to the pioneer batch of the International Islamic University (IIUM) and graduated with a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B Hons) in 1987. He joined the Malaysian Judicial and Legal Service in the same year as Magistrate in Kuala Kubu Bharu and later in Kajang, Selangor. In 1991 he was promoted as Senior Assistant Registrar, High Court Kuala Lumpur. Later he was made Deputy Registrar of High Court and Head, Research Division of the Federal Court of Malaysia. In 1994 he was transferred as Deputy Public Prosecutor, Kuala Lumpur.

114

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

YA was called to the Malaysian Bar as an Advocate & Solicitor, High Court of Malaya in July 1996. In September 1996 he pursued his masters in maritime law in University of Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom and upon return to Malaysia was appointed Senior Federal Counsel (International and Advisory Division) Attorney General’s Chambers. In 2000 he was transferred as Deputy Registrar, High Court, Georgetown. In the same year he was transferred back to the Federal Court as Special Officer to the Chief Justice Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin Haji Abdullah. In 2002 he was promoted as Sessions Judge but continued to work under the Chief Justice’s office. In September 2002 he won the prestigious Chevening Scholarship from the British Government to pursue his Ph.D in Maritime Law and Policy at the Greenwich Maritime Institute, University of Greenwich, London. While in London, he was attached to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as an intern. Upon return from his doctoral studies in 2006 he was made Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Defence and Director of Legal and Investigations of the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA). In 2009 he was seconded to the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Authority (MTJA) as its Legal and Administration Manager before opting for early retirement in August 2011. Upon retirement, YA Dr Sabirin joined Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) as Professor of Business Law and Ethics in the International Business School (IBS), Kuala Lumpur until his appointment recently as Judicial Commissioner. During his student days YA was an active student and had participated in student activities at university and national levels. He was an exco member of Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Pelajar-Pelajar Islam Malaysia (PKPIM). His passion in writing saw him contributing articles in newspapers and he also won a number of writing competitions at national and regional levels. He was elected President, Persatuan Alumni UIAM for two sessions 2000-2004 and is still active in the UIAM Alumni activities. During his days in the Judicial and Legal Service, he was also elected as President, Judicial and legal Officers Association (JALSOA) 2006-2007 and Chairman, Kelab Sukan and Kebajikan Mahkamah Agung (SUKMA) 1993-1994. YA Dr Sabirin is an avid reader with varied interests in law, ethics, religion, history and government. He is also a keen sportsman and keeps fit by playing golf, table tennis and swimming. YA is married to Puan Rizq Fairuz Mohd Ramli, a lecturer in IIUM and they are blessed with three children. YA was appointed as Judicial Commissioner on 13 October 2014 and took up posting at the High Court in Johor Bahru on the next day. Dear members, The Committee had met Yang Arif upon his arrival, introduced ourself and pledged our co-operation. Now that we are all here as members of the Bar, let’s put our hands together as the Bar and officially congratulate and welcome YA Dr Sabirin to Johor. I must say, to be honest, that YA is not really a newcomer now for many of us at the Johore Bar. YA has been very supportive of the Johore Bar since his arrival and has been kind enough to attend as our guests at several of our events by now. So we have more or less got to know YA already. As we saw from YA’s antecedents earlier, YA seems to be an all rounder - a lawyer, academic, writer and a sportsman. I see plenty of room for the Johore Bar to leverage on YA’s talents. In fact YA has already taken part in our Police-Bar Bench Games yesterday evening when along with YA Tuan Teo Say Eng they played doubles at the table tennis competition yesterday and took on the Police team.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

115

YA Dr Sabirin must be the first judge to have been made to sweat by the Johore Bar even before the official welcoming is rolled out. Now that I have introduced the Judicial Commissioner, allow me to introduce ourselves, the Johor Bar Committee to the Judicial Commissioner. As I thought of how to go about this, I felt that a brief note of our history would be appropriate. The Johore Bar Committee is a creature of statute. The first Johore Bar Committee was created pursuant to s.39 (2) of the Advocates & Solicitors Ordinance 1947. Prior to that there was the Advocates & Solicitors Enactment of Federated Malay States 1940 and the Advocates and Solicitors Enactment of Johor. The 1947 Ordinance empowered the states of Malaya to form a local Bar Committee if the number of practitioners in the state bar exceeded 10. In the 1950’s, 60’s and 70’s by reason of Johore’s close proximity to Singapore, a large number of Singapore lawyers were also practising in Johor. Many Singapore law firms had offices here. Johore Courts were open on Saturdays and Sundays then while Singapore Courts had their weekends; so the Singapore lawyers were taking up work here on their off days. They were known, in a less approving manner, as “Sunday lawyers” or “weekend lawyers”. Prominent lawyers from the Singapore Bar like R. Murugason, R Ramason, Omar Salleh, Sim Teow Geok, T.T. Rajah, S K Lee, Peter Williams, and of course Lee Kuan Yew were regularly appearing in the Johore Courts. During this period the chairman of Johore Bar Committee and its members in the 50s, 60s and 70s were Singapore lawyers. They were not only taking away work; they were also running the Johore Bar. The Chairman in 1966-67 was Tan Sri Syed Esa Almenoar, followed by R. Ramason and then John Pillai. It was only from the 70’s that Malaysians took over the reign of Johore Bar Committee and we started to manage our own affairs. The late Abdullah A Rahman – who was also the brother of the then Deputy Prime Minister Tun Dr Ismail – became the first local Chairman of the Johore Bar in 1970. He was the Chairman for more than a decade and was held in high esteem at the Bar. He still is. The “weekend lawyers” from Singapore must have caused great concern to the local members. Around 1970, an amendment was passed to sec. 5(1) of the Advocates and Solicitors Ordinance 1947 to permit only permanent residents of Malaysia or Malaysian citizens to be admitted to the Bar and carry on practice and maintain offices in Malaysia. By this amendment, the practice of weekend lawyers from Singapore coming in and taking away work was dealt with. Many Singapore law firms in Johore changed hands and local lawyers took over. It is commonly understood that the late Abdullah A Rahman played a significant role in lobbying for this amendment that proved to be of great benefit to Johore lawyers. The Legal Profession Act came in 1976 and repealed the 1947 Ordinance. The new Act put in place a new structure for the legal profession, Malaysian Bar and also the State Bar and this stays till today. Over the years the Johore Bar played a prominent role at the Malaysian Bar. Several Presidents of the Malaysian Bar came from the Johore Bar. The late Abdullah A Rahman, was the first Malaysian Bar President to have come from the Johore Bar – from 1978-1980. In recent times it was Dato’ Hj Kuthubul Zaman (President in 2003 – 2005) and Dato’ Yeo Yang Poh – President in 2005 – 2007 – who I am happy to say is also with us today. The Johore Bar also broke the gender barrier. The 1st lady President of the Malaysian Bar Puan Hendon Bte Mohamad also came from the Johore Bar. In stating this brief history, I must put on record my appreciation to senior lawyer and former Chairman of the Johore Bar Mr S. Balarajah for taking on the task of writing the history of Johore Bar Committee. I have merely read out a part of the Johore Bar history that he has written and available at the Johore Bar website. I strongly urge the younger members to read more on this history at our website.

116

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

The Johore Bar, with 1,791 lawyers is now the 3rd largest Bar in this country. We are known for our close rapport with the Bench. There is a good sense of respect and mutual understanding of each other’s role in the administration of justice. Although we can be quite vocal on some issues and less agreeable at times particularly on court matters, we are also known for prioritizing our good relationship with the Bench. It is this good relationship that has allowed us to deal with many Court issues, including sensitive ones, that surfaces from time to time in an amicable, respectful and constructive ways. For this, I must thank our judges and judicial commissioners for their continuous engagement and kind understanding with the Bar. YA Dr Sabirin, We hope to establish the same close, cordial working relationship with YA – for the Bar and the Bench are partners in the administration of justice. For this, I pledge the Johore Bar’s full support and co-operation to Yang Arif in carrying out your judicial responsibility. We wish for Yang Arif to enjoy a long and distinguished career on the Bench and for a pleasant stay in this city. On a more selfish note, I also look forward to YA’s support for our Bar events, not only the sporting events but also look forward to receiving your writings for our Johore Bar publication INFO JOHORE BAR – now that we found out that YA has a penchant for writing – and a prize winning writer too. Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng, Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan and Yang Arif Dato’ Mat Zara’ai, thank you for accepting our invitation to join us in welcoming your new brother judge. Fellow members of the Bar, thank you for your kind attendance. I also wish to thank the Social Sub Committee led by En. Fadhil and the JBC secretariat staff led by Siti for your effort and time in organizing this pleasant evening. As with all of us today, I also look forward to hear from our new Judicial Commissioner after this. Please enjoy your evening. Thank you. R. Jayabalan Chairman

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

117

SEMINAR INTRODUCTION ON GST ON 28 NOVEMBER 2014 AT BERJAYA WATERFRONT HOTEL, JOHOR BAHRU On 25 October 2013, the Malaysian government announced that the Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) will be implemented on 1 April 2015. The GST is set to replace the current sales and services tax. The CPD Committee in collaboration with the Bar Council CPD Department, organised the second session of the GST Talk on 28th November 2014 at Berjaya Waterfront Hotel, Johor Bahru. 250 persons attended the seminar. The speakers were Mr. Anand Raj and Mr. Benedict Francis, covered topics on key GST principles, scope and charges to tax, case studies (in relation to GST), comparative legislation, criminal provisions and implications on law firms.

118

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SEMINAR ON BILLING & COLLECTIONS ON 5TH DECEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM The Continuing Professional Development Sub-Committee of the Johore Bar in collaboration with the Bar Council Professional Indemnity Insurance Committee organised seminar on Billing & Collections conducted by Mr. Tony Woon and Mr. Balbir Singh. 50 persons attended the seminar.

TALK ON GOOD CONSCIENCE IN LEGAL PRACTICE AND PROFESSIONALISM BY TUAN ROSLAN BIN MAT NOR, CHAIRMAN OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT JOHOR BAHRU ON 15TH DECEMBER 2014 AT JOHORE BAR AUDITORIUM

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

119

2ND JOHORE BAR PAINTBALL TOURNAMENT HELD ON 6 DECEMBER 2014 ORGANISED BY THE YOUNG LAWYERS AND CHAMBERING PUPILS COMMITTEE

120

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

FAREWELL DINNER IN HONOUR OF YA TUAN GUNALAN MUNIANDY ON 22ND DECEMBER 2014 AT PUTERI PACIFIC HOTEL, JOHOR BAHRU

A group photo for posterity

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

121

SPEECH BY CHAIRMAN OF JOHORE BAR AT FAREWELL DINNER IN HONOUR OF YA TUAN GUNALAN MUNIANDY The distinguished guest of honour, Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan Muniandy with spouse Puan Sithira Devi The honourable Judges Hakim Utama Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak, Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng with spouse Puan Poh Hui Lin and Judicial Commissioner Yang Arif Dr Sabirin Bin Ja’afar. The honourable Chairman of the Industrial Court YA Tuan Roslan bin Mat Nor. And fellow members of the Bar,

R. Jayabalan

A very good evening to all of you. On behalf of the Johore Bar, I welcome you to this farewell dinner in honour of Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan who will be transferred to the High Court in Shah Alam from 1st January. When news first came about that Justice Gunalan will be transferred, there were some murmurs amongst members of whether the folks at the top of the judiciary for some reasons have disliked Johor as our High Court judges are being taken away one by one in quick succession. Only recently they took away YA Dato’ Rahman Sebli and YA Dato’ Samsudin, now it is YA Tuan Gunalan and tomorrow we are having another farewell in Muar for YA Dato’ Zainal Azman bin Ab Aziz – who will be moving to the High Court at Kuala Terengganu from 1st January as well. I firmly believe that I would be speaking for the majority of the members of the Johore Bar if I say that if it is up to us, Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan would not be leaving Johore Bahru for a long time to come but unfortunately, it is not in our hands, when the order comes, the faithful servant has no choice but to take his bag and seek his leave. And so we come to accept that our judge, our good judge, would indeed be leaving to continue his duty elsewhere – that is to the High Court in Shah Alam. It is customary that at every farewell, we look back at the judge’s antecedents. Some at the Bar have wondered why should we do this when the judge is already leaving. What is the point of knowing about the judge when he is already leaving, and wouldn’t it make more sense to look at the antecedents of a new arriving judge than one who is leaving. To this my friends, the answer is this. When we look at the antecedents of a newly arriving judge it is to know what sort of judge we are getting. When we look at the antecedents of a leaving judge, it is to know what sort of judge we are going to lose and to rue and curse our luck if we don’t get the equally right replacement. On that note, here is the antecedent of YA Tuan Gunalan. YA was born on 10.12.1957 in Klang, Selangor. He is a Klang boy so the transfer to the nearby Shah Alam could not be a bad thing after all for YA. YA graduated with LLB Hons from the Universiti Malaya in 1981. His first judicial job was as a Legal Officer at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur from 2.5.1981. Between Mei 1981 – 1984 he served as Magistrate in Kuala Lumpur and Temerloh. From August 1984 - June 1987 – he served as the Senior Assistant Registrar and later as Deputy Registrar at High Court in Kuala Lumpur. From July 1987- February 1989 – he served as the Senior Assistant Registrar of the Supreme Court.

122

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

From February 1989 – February 1992 – he served as Sessions Judge at Alor Star. February 1992 – September 1995 – he served as Senior Sessions Judge at Melaka and then at Sessions Court Tawau Sabah until June 1996. From June 1996 - Mei 2003 – he was a Sessions Judge in George town, Penang and then transferred to his hometown Klang until February 2008. After that from 4.2.2008 – 10.5.2010 – YA moved to take up post as Senior Sessions Judge at Shah Alam and also as the Pengarah Mahkamah-Mahkamah Selangor. Yang Arif was appointed as Judicial Commissioner on 11.5.2010 and sent to serve at the High Court in Johor Bahru. The Johore Bar hosted a welcoming hi-tea for YA on 30.6.2010 - along with for YA Tuan Samsudin Hassan who also came around the same time as Judicial Commissioner. Many would recall that at that time, when YA Tuan Gunalan and Tuan Samsuddin came, our High Court judges were Tuan Vernon Ong, Dato Hue Siew Kheng, Puan Supang Lian, Tuan Kamardin Hashim and Dato’ Zakiah. Now, after more than 4 years, we can see that there is something like a change of guard that has taken place at our High Court – all the judges who were there when YA Tuan Gunalan first came are no longer in Johor bahru and has moved on. YA would be the last of that batch and upon you leaving, a new batch of judges would be in place in Johor Bahru. Upon arrival as Judicial Comissioner, YA was initially handling criminal cases at the old court building and later heard civil trials as well. When YA Dato’ Hue was transferred, YA Tuan Gunalan took over her court and heard civil appeals, miscellaneous applications and civil trials as well. Many of us would recall seeing the long cause list overflowing beyond the width and length of your court notice board and sometimes they are so lengthy that your interpreters had to resort to posting the extraneous cause list on the wall next to the notice board. Yang Arif, Yang Arif, I would not lie – today, there are instances, when we hear of certain judges being transferred that we lawyers rejoice and thank our respective God and angels for answering our nightly prayers - particularly when judges of a certain ‘type’ is being taken out from Johor Bahru, but I can safely say that YA Tuan Gunalan would not be one of the type that we would have prayed to be transferred. I have asked around to more or less confirm my own views in respect of YA’s impending transfer and the response was near unanimous. This transfer is bad news, it would be a significant loss for us and the Johore Bar will certainly miss YA. There is one myth at the Johore Bar that the popularity of a judge is measured by the attendance at his farewell. When there is good attendance, it means he was a good judge, a popular judge and one who was nice to the lawyers. If it is a small number, then it is the opposite. I said that this is a myth because we have had farewells in the past for judges whom we thought may not be as ‘lawyer friendly’ as we would have liked but the attendance was very good - when in fact we had feared the worst in terms of lawyers attending. One particular farewell comes to mind – about 8-9 years ago. That judge is now at the Court of Appeal. The attendance at his farewell was so good, when we had feared the worst, I suspect that even the Judge was quite surprised with his popularity. However we suspected that the large attendance may not be as much as for his popularity than as to a sense of relief that he was going and lawyers had come in good numbers to really confirm that he was definitely going and to celebrate that he was gone. However, I can assure YA Tuan Gunalan that the good attendance tonight is none of that sort. The attendance of our members tonight is really in sincere gratitude and appreciation of Yang Arif’s tenure of service in Johor Bahru. One important value that defines a judge and that that becomes his legacy long after his retirement, or in our case after his transfer, apart from judicial ability and respect for the law - is judicial temperament.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

123

For lawyers, very often when we appear before the bench, judicial temperament is what we are first concerned with. It is true that judicial temperament is not a substitute for judicial ability or intellect and by itself cannot result in a successful administration of justice but nevertheless it is judicial temperament that very often provides the accommodation or setting for a proper display of judicial ability and goes on to facilitate the co-operation between the lawyer and judge in the search for justice in a given case. Judicial temperament remains as one golden value that very often decides how smooth would our case proceed and sometimes its fate. When proper judicial temperament is not displayed, very often, inside the courtroom, the administration of justice gets derailed and discontent would rein between the respective members of the bar and bench. This discontent, for an unsuccessful party and his lawyer, has the effect of taking the shine out, or decolouring, of any decision that is subsequently given however correct and legally sound it may be. Our former Lord President Justice Tun Suffian once said: “As for being a good judge, I would say a judge should be a person who has a sound understanding of general principles and has judicial temperament, that is to say, he is a person who is willing to listen and is capable of learning more law as he goes along; who is courteous, has an instinctive ‘feel’ for what is proper and what is not, for what is right and what is not in and out of court; and a person who is not personal and vindictive, who will decide solely on the facts as disclosed in the evidence before him and in accordance with his perception of the law, with his ideas of justice and in accordance with his conscience. In a multi-racial and multi-religious society like yours and mine, while we judges cannot help being Malay or Chinese or Indian; or being Muslim or Buddist or Hindu or whatever, we strive not to be too identified with any particular race or religion – so that nobody reading our judgment with our name deleted could with confidence identify our race or religion, and so that the various communities, especially minority communities, are assured that we will not allow their rights to be trampled underfoot.” - referred to by Court of Appeal in Nik Nazmi bin Nik Ahmad v PP [2014] MLJU 336 The American Bar Association defined “judicial temperament” as having “compassion, decisiveness, openmindedness, sensitivity, courtesy, patience, freedom from bias and commitment to equal justice.” YA has served in Johore Bahru for more than 4 years now. We welcomed you as a newly minted Judicial Commissioner and since then members have been impressed with and taken comfort with many of that wonderful values of judicial temperament that was so amply put on display in your court. During your service here, with the wide array of matters that you were handling, almost all court going lawyers in Johor would have had the benefit and may I also say the pleasure of appearing before you. I must say, and I firmly believe that I speak for the whole Bar when I say that, whatever maybe the outcome, we have left your courtroom impressed with the judicial temperament that you displayed, your courtesy, patience and understanding. The judicial landscape has changed. It has undergone a revolution over the last few years. The Judiciary have taken steps – big, bold and decisive – in ensuring efficiency consistent with the motto of ‘just, expeditious and economic disposal of cases’. The bad old days of 5 years or thereabout for disposal of cases were put to rest – and rightly so . The Bar has welcomed these steps and has been supportive of the Judiciary in this exercise. These steps have brought about additional responsibilities, perhaps a burden on judicial officers to ensure cases are disposed off within the prescribed timelines. This has brought about, in some instances, discontent with the way cases are being managed by a particular court or judicial officer. Judicial temperament was called into question. Issues were raised on whether judicial temperament was being forsaken in the pursuit of judicial efficiency. Yang Arif Tuan Gunalan has shown that within this climate of pursuit towards efficiency, the administration of justice can still achieve its purpose by a display of judicial temperament with genuine show of humility, common courtesy and mutual respect to all counsel who enters his courtroom. Yang Arif also put in practice that proper judicial temperament would be equally effective and efficient in meeting the ends of justice, if not more. This has made it a pleasure for us lawyers to appear before Your Lordship and contributed towards a good healthy relationship between the bar and bench in Johor Bahru. We will certainly miss the pleasure of appearing before you YA!

124

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Dear members, YA has been a good supporter of our Bar events. He has regularly attended our events, exchanged ideas and had always looked forward to meeting lawyers. For this I wish to put on record the Johore Bar’s appreciation to YA’s support. The Johore Bar is indeed privileged to have had YA in Johor Bahru. We wish to have you longer here but that’s not gonna happen now. We are bidding you farewell to Shah Alam. I understand that Yang Arif and your beloved spouse Puan Sithira Devi are looking forward to the transfer for that would bring you nearer to your lovely children. So I suppose we would share your joy in knowing that the transfer has a personal benefit for Yang Arif. Yang Arif, I believe you must have enjoyed your stay in Johor Bahru and I sincerely hope that we have taken care of you well. We now hope that the Shah Alam lawyers will do the same. On behalf of the Johore Bar I sincerely pray and hope for Yang Arif to have a long and distinguished career on the Bench. Before I end, I feel that I must also say this. Very often at our events we have spoken at length about the relationship between the Bar and Bench in Johor Bahru. However there is one other relationship that is very much understated – that is the one between our brother judges. Many of us, during our events, would have noticed and heard of the brotherhood and camaraderie between them and also about our judges regular makan trips. This is a wonderful thing. I do not know whether this also happens in other states, and I am sure that YA Gunalan and spouse would fondly miss this camaraderie and friendly banter as well. On this note, I also wish to record the Johore Bar’s appreciation to Hakim Utama YA Dato’ Mohd Sofian, Yang Arif Tuan Teo Say Eng and Yang Arif Dr Sabirin for joining us tonight in bidding farewell to your brother judge. I understand that YA Dato’ Mat Zara’ai has gone to perform umrah and as such is not able to join us. To the charming spouse of Yang Arif, Puan Sithira Devi, I hope that you have enjoyed your stay in Johor Bahru and hopefully, at our functions, you would have found Johore lawyers to be charming as well! I hope that you and the spouse of YA Tuan Teo Say Eng, Puan Poh Hui Lin would enjoy yourself tonight in our company. Dear members, thank you for your attendance tonight. Your presence shows the respect and regard that we have for our judges in Johor Bahru. The Bar Committee is grateful for your support. I wish to thank the Social Chairperson Mr Fadhil, his committee members and the secretariat staff for working on extra hours to ensure the success of this event. I know this must be tiring – we have been having one event after another during the last few months, but hang on, not for long. The AGM is coming soon. Dear members and guests, thank you. Good night and enjoy your meal. R. Jayabalan Chairman

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

125

Farewell Speech by YA Tuan Gunalan Muniandy Brother judges and Judicial Commissioners (‘JCs’) of the JBHC, the Honorable Chairman of the Johor Baru Committee (JBC), respected members of the JBC, present at this auspicious/lavish function, ladies and gentlemen. A very good evening and thank you to the JBC, for inviting my wife and I to this farewell function. The invitation card that ensued in due course after your Honorable Chairman called on me in Chambers to fix a date for this function states expressly invitation to attend the dinner in conjunction with my farewell ceremony. Hence, going by the principle of strict interpretation, which is the cardinal rule of our beloved profession, there is no duty cast on the part of the invited guest to make any speech. Having said that however, I am more than pleased and honored to oblige the request from an excellent and gracious host, i.e., the JBC, whose hospitality and courtesy I had the privilege of enjoying throughout the past almost 5 years given gratuitously and sincerely. I suppose this is payback time in kind as it is called. There is an economics principle/maxim the which goes like this. “There is no such thing as a free lunch, You have to pay one way or another.” My trepidation tonight is having to play the role of the poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more, to quote from William Shakespeare in Macbeth. YA Tuan Gunalan delivering his speech With that brief introduction, I must first of all take this opportunity to record my heartfelt appreciation to the Johor Bar Committee (JBC) and you, the members, for sacrificing you precious time despite hectic schedules and year end deadlines to host this auspicious function in honor of my impending transfer to the Shah Alam High Court. I am greatly honored and would certainly cherish eternally this thoughtful gesture which is in keeping with your entrenched/time-honoured traditions. I am indeed overwhelmed and honored by the presence of so many of you tonight, including senior members and to a certain extent, awed by the occasion. Lest I forget, I must also express my appreciation to several senior members who called on me personally or sent messages by letter to convey their best wishes for my future in the Judiciary and regrets for not being able to be present due to the holiday season. To the Honorable Chairman, my thanks for the compliments, praises and wishes. Whether or not I am worthy of these is a different story and subject at a different discussion but I, would nevertheless take them in my stride and hope to live up to expectations of the Bar specifically and society in general. As the dawn of the New Year approaches, my stint in the JHBC which has stretched for close to 5 years is drawing to a close. While I earnestly look forward to returning to the Klang Valley where my family and I are domiciled, the undivided support, understanding and cooperation that I received from the Johor Bar throughout the last 4 – 5 years right from the word go in the discharge of my onerous duties as a Judicial Commissioner of the High Court will always be considered a great blessing, for which I, together with my brother Judges and JCs owe a debt of gratitude. Not to forget of course for the overwhelming hospitality and courtesy shown to members of the Bench regardless of seniority/position. To give you a bit of flashback, I set foot in Johor Bahru on 10.05.2010 to begin my service as a JC after the swearing in ceremony before the then Chief Judge of Malaya, Tun Arifin Zakaria (now Chief Justice). There were 7 judges and JCs back then. We have since parted company and all of them have left, the last being YA Datuk Samsudin. Of the original group, I am the only one remaining and left standing in JB. Being the first posting as JC of the High Court upon optional retirement from the judicial and legal service, the JBHC occupies a special place in the history of my career, having served more than 29 years in the subordinate courts and as SAR of the High Court and Supreme Court. I am fortunate now to return to the Klang Valley without any further uprooting of the family with the wish that the good fortune would not stop there and my stay in the Judiciary would not be shortlived. I do not wish to quote from any lofty statements on law and justice as I’m sure you have heard all that. I only wish to say my piece on this subject. Even though the Bar and Bench have separate and distinct roles to play in the administration of justice and upholding the rule of law, each unique in its own way, it is important to bear in mind our fundamental and sacred objective, which is, ultimately and above all the attainment of justice. As vital components

126

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

of the legal fraternity, we have this common and noble purpose. It is all the more important, in these trying and challenging times where pressing issues dominate the landscape that we are united in our stand to accord to the Law and the Constitution their rightful place. Indeed, to quote from a popular online news portal, “Malaysia’s ability and responsibility in demonstrating that justice is done is the very cornerstone of this multiracial, multi-religion and multicultural population once dubbed with hope as the Rising Tiger”. Let us in the nation’s interests join hands and demonstrate that justice can and will be done knowing that whatever shall part we play individually would go a long way in attaining the noble goal of Justice and Right. The importance of a harmonious and amicable relationship between the Bar, the Bench and the Legal Department as the 3 vital organs in the administration of justice cannot be gainsaid or overstated. To quote the Dalai Lama, “Wherever I go meeting the public spreading a message of human values, spreading a message of harmony, is, the most important”. With a harmonious relationship, the multitude of problems facing the efficient and fair administration of justice can be overcome and wasteful conflict within the fraternity can be minimized. In Johor, I can safely attest to the excellent relationship between the Bar, the Bench and the Legal Department that has over the years enabled solutions to recurring problems without the need to find excuses for disregarding or neglecting problems. It was fostered, no doubt, to a large extent by the tireless efforts of the Johor Bar. Having said the above, I believe that this speech is substantial enough to earn this farewell dinner and to a certain extent, justify the warm hospitality and courtesy that has been showered on me by the Johor Bar throughout my stay here. I sincerely hope that there has been no failure of or insufficient consideration on my part. To conclude, I can’t help but to quote Shakespeare again. Part of the renowned stanza from As You Like It, Act II, Scene III reads: “All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and entrances, And one man in his time plays many parts, His acts having seven ages”. How true the sage words of the Bard that have rung true throughout the history of Mankind. My entrance is long gone and the time now is to make my exit. Lastly, till we meet again at another place, another time, I bid you adieu and may God bless everyone of you with a long life, eternal good health and all the success in the legal profession. Thank you. Tuan Gunalan Muniandy Judicial Commissioner High Court of Malaya 22 December 2014

Remember Johore Bar

From left: Puan Sithira Devi, YA Tuan Gunalan, YA Dr Sabirin, YA Dato’ Sofian, YA Tuan Teo Say Eng, Puan Poh Hui Lin

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

127

FAREWELL HIGH TEA IN HONOUR OF YA DATO’ HJ. ZAINAL AZMAN BIN AB AZIZ ON 23RD DECEMBER 2014 AT MUAR TRADERS HOTEL, MUAR JOHOR

128

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

SPEECH BY CHAIRMAN OF JOHORE BAR AT FAREWELL HIGH TEA IN HONOUR OF YA DATO’ HJ. ZAINAL AZMAN BIN AB AZIZ The distinguished guests of honour, YA Dato’ Hj Zainal Azman Bin Ab Aziz, High Court Judge in Muar, Hakim Utama from Johore Bahru Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Sofian bin Tan Sri Abd Razak, Yang Arif Datuk Samsudin Bin Hassan, High Court Judge from Ipoh, Honourable Deputy Registrars, Senior Asistant Registrars and Magistrates, And my fellow members of the Bar, good evening to all of you.

R. Jayabalan

On behalf of the Johore Bar, I extend to you a warm welcome to this farewell high tea that is in honour of our resident judge YA Dato’ Hj Zainal Azman who will be going on transfer to the Kuala Terengganu High Court from 1.1.2015. As members would have noticed, there is a quite a major reshuffling going on at the courts now in terms of placement of High Court judges. There is a lot of movement going on around the country. This is already felt in Johor Bahru where during the last 2-3 months we have seen several judges being transferred out and coming in in quick succession. At Johor Bahru we have seen that YA Dato’ Rahman Sebli and YA Datuk Samsudin were transferred out – of course with a promotion to Court of Appeal for YA Dato’ Rahman Sebli whilst YA Datuk Samsudin was transferred to Ipoh. On this note, I am happy to see that YA Datuk Samsudin is able to join us today. It is wonderful to know of YA to still remember us although we belong to different states now. After YA Datuk Samsudin’s transfer, next on line was Judicial Commissioner YA Tuan Gunalan. In fact we just had a farewell for YA Tuan Gunalan yesterday and now today is the farewell for YA Dato’ Zainal Azman. In the meanwhile 2 new Judicial Commissioners have come in to Johor Bahru – YA Dato’ Mat Zara’ai and YA Dr Sabirin. And I understand a new High Court judge will be coming in soon to Muar as well. We also hope to get another judge for Johor Bahru to replce YA Tuan Gunalan. So there is a big shake up going on and we can expect plenty of changes coming in soon with the new judges coming in. Coming back to the farewell today, YA Dato’ Zainal Azman has served in Muar since 16.1.2013 – for almost about 2 years now. When news broke out about YA’s transfer it was quite a surprise to us as many felt that YA is still new in Muar and was not expecting a transfer anytime soon. However that is not to be, the order has come so the transfer has to go on. So we have to let YA to take his leave from this peaceful town. Dear members, The transfer of a judge always generate mixed feelings at the Bar. Sometimes we are happy that a judge is going and sometimes it is otherwise. As you would guess it depends on the judge or more accurately members’ perception of the judge. For a judge who brings nightmares in our sleep, - I think we know there can be a few judges like that - a transfer is God’s answer to our prayers. When such transfers take place it sort of reinforces our belief that sometimes God answers lawyers’ prayers too. So the farewell is a good occasion, one we can be happy about. Sadness is when a good judge leaves and we do not know who or what type we are going to get next.

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

129

As I also mentioned at YA Tuan Gunalan’s farewell yesterday, YA Dato’ Sofian would have heard this, there is one myth at the Johore Bar that the popularity of a judge is measured by the attendance at his farewell. When there is good attendance, it means he was a good judge, and was nice to the lawyers. If it is a small number, then it is the opposite. I said that this is a myth because we have had farewells in the past for judges whom we thought may not be as ‘lawyer friendly’ as we would have liked but the attendance was very good - when in fact we had feared the worst in terms of lawyers attending. One particular farewell comes to mind – about 8-9 years ago. That judge is now at the Court of Appeal. The attendance at his farewell was so good, when we had feared the worst, I suspect that even the Judge was quite surprised with his popularity. However we suspected that the large attendance may not be as much as for his popularity than as to a sense of relief that he was going and lawyers had come to confirm that he was definitely going and upon that to celebrate that he was gone. From my own views and upon talking to our Northern Johore Chairperson, Puan Shahareen I would safely say that the good number of lawyers present today is for the right reason – it is for a genuine expression of gratitude and appreciation of YA Dato’ Hj Zainal’s service and contribution in Muar. It is an expression from our members that this transfer is not one that we would have liked and that the Johore Bar, particularly from North Johor would certainly going to miss YA. Dear members, The Johore Bar Committee paid a courtesy call on YA on 3.4.2014 after taking office following the AGM. We had pledged our assistance and co-operation to Yang Arif in the administration of justice in Muar. At that time YA gave his commitment that the doors of his chambers would always be open to the Committee, that he strongly believes in the importance of a close relationship between the Bar and the Bench and we could seek for his assistance whenever necessary. I am happy to say that we have not been disappointed. YA has been true to his word and we have had a wonderful working relationship with YA. Our only regret is that YA is moving out of town too soon! YA appreciated the Bar’s importance and was willing to lend a hand whenever we sought for his intervention. YA appreciated the fact that the bar and bench must complement each other and that one cannot exist meaningfully without the other. On this note, I must put on record the Johore Bar’s appreciation to Yang Arif for your assistance, co-operation and time whenever necessary. At the elevation ceremony of Justice Suffian as a High Court Judge in 1961, His Lordship, said this on the need for the bar and bench to work together : “I yield to no one in recognition of the difficulty and importance of the office which I now have the honour of occupying. In evenly balancing the scales of justice, I will help to maintain the rule of law and two essentials of that rule are the independence of the Bar and the independence of the Judiciary. In our separate tasks we both strive to seek the light of truth. But let us not forget that our tasks will be made much easier if we all try to discharge our duty – you to your client – I to my conscience – in as dispassionate a manner as possible each respecting the other’s integrity and intelligence with the maximum courtesy with no bickering with little or no loss of temper for much heat seldom produces much light.” Though personally, I have not had much opportunity to appear before YA, from my conversations with many members from Muar and Batu Pahat I have to come to know that members have always found it to be a pleasure to appear before YA.

130

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

YA has displayed common courtesy, mutual respect and kindness in dealing with lawyers and litigants alike with the right judicial temperament. YA has always been kind and understanding to lawyer’s difficulties in the course of proceedings and has sought to accommodate whenever possible. The Bar is indeed thankful for this. The Johore Bar also wishes to record our appreciation to Yang Arif for your support to the Johore Bar programs at this side of the state. We will indeed miss you. Now that we are bidding farewell to YA I hope that YA have enjoyed yourself in Muar and you would go on to enjoy your stay in Kuala Terengganu. On behalf of the Johore Bar I sincerely pray and hope for Yang Arif to have a healthy life with a long and distinguished career on the Bench. I also would like to put on record our appreciation to YA Hakim Utama Dato’ Mohd Sofian for accepting our invitation and joining us from Johor Bahru in bidding farewell to his brother judge. Yang Arif’s presence and not to mention YA Dato Samsudin’s presence today is not only a reflection of the good relationship between the bar and the bench in Johore but also the brotherhood and solidarity between our judges in Johor. I must also thank all the judicial officers - Sessions Judge, Deputy Registrars, SAR and Magistrates, for taking time to attend this function today and in joining to bid farewell to YA. Dear members, thank you for your attendance this evening. Your presence shows the respect and regard that we have for our judge YA Dato’ Zainal Azman. The committee looks forward to your continuing support for our programs. I also wish to thank Puan Shahareen and her committee members and Puan Rosita, our secretariat staff, for successfully organizing this event. Thank you and please enjoy your evening. R. Jayabalan Chairman

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

131

OBITUARY THE LATE LAU KOH KONG 19/01/1951 – 11/8/2014 The Johore Bar is saddened to record the passing away of one of its senior members the late Mr Lau Koh Kong of Kulai, Johor on the 11th of August 2014. The funeral took place in Kulai on the 15th August 2014. The late lawyer was a Barrister-at-Law of the Hon. Society of the Lincoln’s Inn, London and was admitted and enrolled as an Advocate & Solicitor States of Malaya on the 8th of June 1984. In the Johor Bar seniority list he was No. 116.

The Late Lau Koh Kong

In the early years lawyers in Johor practiced mainly in the big towns, like the capital city of Johor Bahru and in Muar, Batu Pahat, Segamat and Kluang. The late Mr Lau was one of the early pioneers to start out in the outlying district of Kulai about 30km from the city of Johor Bahru. In his own quiet way he was a trend-setter. He practiced under the name and style of Lau Koh Kong & Associates in Kulai.

It appears that the late lawyer comes from a family of lawyers. A brother Datuk Wira Lau Hop Bing was one of His Majesty’s Judges in the Court of Appeal. His eldest child Ms Lau Seow Mui and son Lau Kei Jin are both members of the Bar having graduated in laws from the University of Manchester and later on successfully obtained the CLP and practice in the father’s firm. The late lawyer leaves behind his widow Madam Chai Chu Lam and 4 children. The Johor Bar offers its deepest condolences to the family of the late Mr Lau Koh Kong. In consolation a useful reminder to the bereaved is that good memories are the most precious of all our personal treasures. We have to learn to nurture and cherish them and they will remain with us till time shall be no more. US President George Bush is reputed to have said :

“Grief and tragedy are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end.”

May the late Mr Lau Koh Kong rest in peace. S. Balarajah Johore Bar 18-8-2014

Rousing adieu for the late top Singapore lawyer Subhas Anandan

132

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

OBITUARY THE LATE LOH SONG CHUAN @ LAW SONG CHUAN 26/12/1951 – 4/11/2014 The Late Loh Song Chuan Mr Loh Song Chuan alias Law Song Chuan, 63, a senior member of the Johor Bar passed away at the Mount Elizabeth Hospital, Singapore on the 1st day of November 2014 and his remains were cremated at the Ngee Heng Crematorium Johor Bahru on the 4th November. Loh was from the little town of Panchor, near Pagoh, Muar and was educated at the Muar High School. He then joined the Singapore Police Force and resigned therefrom as an Inspector of Police to pursue his desire to become an Advocate and Solicitor. He obtained a Bachelor of Laws Degree and the Certificate in Legal Practice. He was admitted to the Malaysian Bar on 28.8.1985. Loh practiced under the name and style of Loh & Renga and had offices in Johor Bahru, Pontian and Batu Pahat. The late Mr Loh handled civil litigation and conveyancing and was a quiet practitioner of the laws. He did not in any way demean and or diminish the noble aims and regulations of the Bar but was decent and dutiful in his professional calling. He was married to Elsie Tan a Chartered Valuation Surveyor and leaves behind 2 sons Winston Loh a Pharmacist and Wilfred Loh a Business and Law undergraduate in Australia. Loh was a very quiet and unassuming person socially and professionally. Almost inhibited coy and reticent, he kept largely to himself. A private person one might say. The Johore Bar offers its condolences to Ms Elsie Tan and the 2 sons. We offer some words of the wise in consolation to the bereaved family: “As soon as a man is born he begins to die.” (Luigi Pirandello, Henry IV) “Death is a debt we all must pay.”(Euripides) May the Late Loh Song Chuan rest in peace. May his God be merciful in his judgment and grant the late lawyer eternal peace. So may it be. S. Balarajah Johore Bar 5.11.2014

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

133

OBITUARY

THE LATE RAVINDRAN A/L G.S PARAMASIVAN (5.12.1957 – 7.12.2014) The Johore Bar is sad to record the passing away of yet another one of its members, Ravindran a/l G.S Paramasivan better known as GSP Ravi who passed away peacefully in Johor Bahru on 7.12.2014 aged 57. The remains of the late member of the Johore Bar were cremated on 8.12.2014 at the Nirwana Memorial Park, Kulai in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies.

The Late GSP Ravi

GSP Ravi was a Malaysian Teacher Training College trained teacher before he embarked to read law in England. He taught English in various Schools in Mersing. To Ravi law was his passion in life, the other was his love of the Liverpool FC. In fact the night he passed away he had watched enthusiastically the live broadcast of the game between Liverpool vs Sunderland United which ended in a dismal draw. He retired to bed after exchanging the usual commentaries on the game and passed away peacefully. Ravi was a Barrister-at-law of the Hon-Society of Lincoln’s Inn and was admitted to the Malaysian Bar on 23.4.2006. He started practice as a Legal Assistant to Robin Ravindran Mahendran of the firm of M/s R.R Mahendran & Co. After R.R Mahendran’s demise Ravi took over the practice and carried on as a sole-proprietor under the name and style G.S.P Ravindran & Co. His practice was mainly in the Criminal Courts but he also had a fair share of civil litigation. Ravi was in his own way an ardent member of the Bar and strived to do the best for his clients. He leaves behind his beloved wife Susannie and siblings to mourn his passing. We offer our condolences to the family of the late football loving lawyer. The great Khayyam crafted this Rubaiyat: “The Ball no question makes of Ayes and Noes, But Here or There, as strikes the Player, goes; And He that tossed you down into the Field, He knows about it all – He knows – He knows!” - Omar Khayyam May the late G.S.P Ravindran rest in peace in his God’s glorious fields. S. Balarajah 22nd December 2014 Johore Bar

ALLAHYARHAMAH NORISAH BINTI ABU AMAN (14.4.1955 – 18.12.2014) The Johore Bar Committee is deeply saddened by the passing of Puan Norisah Binti Abu Aman on 18.12.2014 on the very fateful day, Allahyarhamah Norisah Binti Abu Aman was on her way to Kota Tinggi to attend a Court case. Allahyarhamah Norisah Binti Abu Aman was called to the Bar on 22.2.2013 upon successfully completed her pupilage at Messrs. Zulkafli, Rani & Co. She then opened her own firm under the name of Messrs Norisah & Co. Allahyarhamah Norisah leaves behind her beloved husband Encik Ismail Bin Osman and a daughter, who is also a member of the Bar, Cik Nurul Afiah Binti Ismail and 2 sons namely, Encik Khairul Faizal Bin Ismail and Encik Shahrul Bin Ismail. JBC extend its deepest condolences to the deceased’s family and relatives and may the family stay strong in these difficult times. AL-FATIHAH.

134

INFO JOHORE BAR – DECEMBER 2014

Allahyarhamah Norisah binti Abu Aman

Congratulations To The Newly Admitted Members of The Bar 2014 (Johor) as at 31 December 2014 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

Alicia Tan Ching Fang Muhammad Taufiq Bin Abdul Jalil Ahmad Soleh Bin Yusof Nur Amalina Binti Khalil Siti Rosilah Binti Mazli Sulaiman Bin Harmain Shah Atuffah Bin Said Tan Chu Er Gan Hwee Theng Nadiah Bte Abu Bakar Norsakinah Mohd Khalid Azmelia Nabila Bt Zainal Abidin Nur â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Azimah Bte Zinaldin Nur Hidayah Binti Muzamil Tan Zhao Lin Mohamad Zuhdi Bin Ahmad Khan Shazalina Binti Shafiee Zulaikha Binti Zulpata Muhammad Naufal Bin Amran Munirah Najihah Binti Shaari Liew Xiao Wei Kamaliah Binti Jamaludin Liyana Mardiana Bt Sariaff Nur Khalis Binti Johar Amin Siti Zubaidah Binti Jemadi Umar Faiz Bin Abdul Kohar Nurulartiah Binti Haris Ahmad Solehin Bin Abd Ghani Suraya Hani Binti Salim Nurul Ain Binti Ibrahim

12/06/2014 12/06/2014 12/06/2014 12/06/2014 12/06/2014 12/06/2014 12/06/2014 22/06/2014 22/06/2014 22/06/2014 22/06/2014 22/06/2014 26/06/2014 26/06/2014 26/06/2014 17/07/2014 17/07/2014 17/07/2014 17/07/2014 17/07/2014 07/08/2014 07/08/2014 07/08/2014 07/08/2014 07/08/2014 10/08/2014 10/08/2014 10/08/2014 10/08/2014 10/08/2014

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56 57. 58. 59.

Fatin Ain Bte Azman Khairul Azmir Bin Zainuddin Lim Cai Chin Gurvinder Kaur a/p Baldave Singh Mohamed Hafiz Bin Hashim Izzati Maria Binti Othman Chong Shin Fei Wee Phei Yinn Tan Yuann Lyn Suhaidah Binti Sulong Nurhidahyu Binti Ngatderi Hamdan Bin Indah Anis Suraya Binti Paisan Daniel Bin Othman Phang Ja Mein Sandrasegaran a/l A. Palaniapan Tang Huixin Amirah Hamizah Binti Abdul Halim Tan Yao Feng Nurul Sakinah Binti Mazlan Daing Nurul Mahfuzah Binti Daing Ibrahim Siti Zakiah Binti Sakaria Nor Hafizah Binti Abdullah Shaarmini a/p Arjunan Lau Kei Yi Sasedharan a/l V Raghavan Siti Khadijah Bt Bahaudin Nur Nabila Bt Mohamad Salleh Balakrishnan a/l Raman Kutty

10/08/2014 10/08/2014 21/08/2014 21/08/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 21/09/2014 02/10/2014 02/10/2014 02/10/2014 12/10/2014 12/10/2014 12/10/2014 12/10/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 16/11/2014 07/12/2014 07/12/2014 07/12/2014

1. Johore Bar Annual General Meeting (AGM) on Saturday, 14th February 2015 at JOTIC Auditorium @ 10.00 a.m. 2. Johore Bar Annual Dinner & Dance (AD&D) on Saturday, 14th February 2015 at Renaissance Hotel, Masai Johor @ 7.30 p.m. 3. Malaysian Bar Annual General Meeting (AGM) on Saturday, 14th March 2015 4. Malaysian Bar Annual Dinner & Dance (AD&D) on Saturday, 14th March 2015

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014

135

Total Membership As at 31st December 2014, the total membership of the Johore Bar is 1796. There has been an increase of 142 members since the last statistics (on 30th April 2014). The total membership of the Johore Bar constitutes 11% approx. of that of the Malaysian Bar. 1. Lawyers in Johor Bahru

There are 1281 members practising in the city of Johor Bahru. They account for 71% of the total membership in the State of Johor (i.e. 1281/1796 members).

2. Law Firms in Johor Bahru

The total number of law firms in the State of Johor is 699. There has been an increase of 24 law firms since April 2014. The number of law firms in Johor Bahru has increased (from 390 to 408). They constitute 58% approx. (i.e. 408/699) of the law firms in the State of Johor.

136

INFO JOHORE BAR â&#x20AC;&#x201C; DECEMBER 2014