Another Year Before The Bar

Come September 2008, fewer Malaysians may seek a law degree from Britain if a proposal to make compulsory a year of chambering in England is accepted. A decision on the matter is expected this month amid protests from the legal fraternity here and the four British Inns of Court.

MALAYSIANS wanting a law degree from Britain and the prestige of being called to the English Bar may want to think twice about it.

They or their parents may have to set aside more money on top of the estimated RM250,000 to RM400,000 for a three-year degree plus living expenses (depending on which university and city) if a British Bar Council proposal to defer call to the Bar comes into effect in September next year.

The decision by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) on the proposal is expected to be announced very soon.

After a three-year law programme, a student may have to take up a 12-month pupillage before being called to the British Bar.

The proposed year of chambering is to check the erosion of the quality of its barristers. It adds a new tier to the route for the prestigious British law degree to being called to the Malaysian Bar (see accompanying table).

The barrister-at-law title, currently obtained after passing the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) and completing the 12 requisite qualifying sessions, may now come with the cost of an additional year.

Despite the pupillage in Britain, returning Malaysians would still have to do nine months of chambering here before they can be admitted to the Malaysian Bar as advocates and solicitors. According to the British Council, there were 540 Malaysians studying various law courses in the 2005/06 academic year.

The proposal came about as a result of public complaints about the quality of barristers and some cases of misrepresentation but it means that the 250-plus Malaysian students graduating a year will have to compete with other foreign as well as British students for the already limited pupillages.

According to the Bar Council, chambers had offered 711 pupillages in 2002/2003. This was less than the 766 the previous year.

But not every Malaysian doing the BVC intends to practise in Britain; more often than not it is for the knowledge and experience, the prestige, future networking, and “Plan B” if they decide to migrate.

While some organisations support the proposal in Britain, others have voiced their objections to BSB. The Inns of Court (through which students are called) have also expressed their concern for students from Malaysia and elsewhere.

Lawyer S. Radhakrishnan, Malaysian Inner Temple Alumni honorary secretary, reminded the BSB that the barrister-at-law title has been a recognised qualification in Malaysia for more than 100 years.

“If the BSB is to adopt the proposal, we believe that this would discourage many Malaysians from enrolling with the Inns of Court, which is their preferred choice, to pursue their objective of becoming a lawyer.”

According to the Bar Council secretariat, of the total 2,017 British qualified lawyers in the Malaysian Bar, those from the Inns number 1,186 (Lincoln), 154 (Inner Temple), 419 (Middle Temple) and 242 (Gray).

By comparison, graduates from Australian universities number 543 and from New Zealand 88.
On a brighter note, all pupillages in Britain have to be paid a minimum of £5,000 (RM35,000) per six months plus reasonable travel expenses.

The £833 (RM5,833) a month is useful but just like the £550(RM3,850), which the Bar Council estimates for the pupils’ wig and gown, there will be other expenses and incidentals depleting that little reservoir.

“I can’t see them spending time and money to train someone who will end up leaving the firm and the country,” said a 1988 Kent University law graduate who did his Bar at Inner Temple.

Could those who had done pupillage in Britain be exempt from chambering here?

“The procedures for even simple applications have changed so much over the years in both countries that a Malaysian lawyer who did pupillage in Britain and did not chamber here would be handicapping himself and his client,” said a Cardiff University graduate who returned home in 1996 to take the Malaysian Certificate of Legal Practice (CLP) instead.

While qualifying for the CLP might be easier, passing it may not be a walk in the park, going by the number of complaints after the results are released.

Taking the CLP option, however, would mean fewer or no ties with the four Inns. In the last 100 years, thousands of Malaysians read law in Britain and returned to set up private practice or serve as a judge or Attorney-General.

From the time of Tun Syed Sheh Barakbah, the first local Lord President, all heads of the judiciary up to Tun Dzaiddin Abdullah have been members of one of the Inns; it is the same with Malaysia’s first three prime ministers and the current deputy prime minister.

Expressing concern for foreign students in a joint report, the Inner Temple and Middle Temple touched on networking in a global world: “The international network of barristers is a valuable connection .... It reinforces the legal culture of the common law world and provides opportunities for international practice.”

With the proposal, the “strong and beneficial international relationships ... would be severed for good.”

Retired British judge Baroness Elizabeth Butler Sloss, who came here last September to launch the Inner Temple alumni, said then: “The proposals for Deferral of Call, if implemented in its currently proposed form, would turn the clock back by making it more difficult for young people from families without private means to study for the Bar.

“And we are well aware of the effect that these proposals might have here in Malaysia on deterring future generations of young student barristers from coming to Britain.”

It was a surprise that British Minister of State for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education Bill Rammell, who was here in February to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to foster collaboration, partnership and exchanges in education between the UK and Malaysia, was not aware of the proposal.

Rammell said he would look into it but the issue would certainly require some input from the Legal Profession Qualifying Board (LPQB) here as well.

There has been a suggestion that a title other than barrister-at-law be given after the Bar final but the LPQB will have to decide whether to accept such an alternative.

It would be ironic if, despite the MoU between the British and Malaysian governments, a solution is not found.

[Source]