BADAN PEGUAM MALAYSIA

On the court record

Illustrates how the profession's representative body assists the courts on constitutional and public-interest questions and how the courts treat its standing to intervene.

The Badan Peguam Malaysia (the Malaysian Bar) appears in this corpus in the constitutional and public-interest role that its governing statute confers on the profession's representative body — to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interest. Its procedural positions reflect that role: it appears as amicus curiae, as the holder of a watching brief, as a proposed intervener and, occasionally, as an applicant in its own name. A striking feature of the corpus is the Bar's participation in matters of high constitutional importance, including proceedings engaging the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Federal Court under Article 4(3) and (4) and Article 128(1) of the Federal Constitution, the freedom of expression under Article 10, and a reference application under section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964. The Bar has also held a watching brief in a criminal appeal concerning the interpretation of the remand power under section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and it appears as an applicant challenging executive action of general significance. The corpus reaches the profession's own regulation as well, including the operation of the Bar Council's Rules and Rulings — for example the rule governing a foreign-currency clients' account. Because the Bar participates to assist the court and to represent the public interest in the administration of justice rather than to advance a claim of its own, its procedural standing is itself frequently significant. The matters are decided across the High Court, the Court of Appeal and, disproportionately, the Federal Court. Collectively the decisions in which the Malaysian Bar participates illustrate how the profession's representative body assists the courts on constitutional and public-interest questions and how the courts treat its standing to intervene. Several of the reported matters also concern the Bar's standing to be heard on a question of public importance and the weight the courts give to its submissions as a body representing the profession, so that its procedural position is itself a recurring subject of the decisions. Across these matters the Bar's participation illustrates the constitutional function of an independent legal profession in the administration of justice.