A Bar Council member strikes back against the Bar Council and its President for the professional body’s stance on BERSIH and attacks against the Police. Lawyer Ranjit Singh Dhillon post a lot of questions for the Bar Council President and made remarks, “There are bad apples in the Bar Council”.
Regarding the report on BERSIH 3.0, Singh claimed the Bar Council is contradicting themselves. He is of the firm belief that there was no proper study for the report to be churned out.
“Are conducting your legal battles in the social media?”
Wednesday May 9, 2012
Ranjit goes on YouTube to seek Bar Council’s explanation on rally
By LOSHANA K SHAGAR
PETALING JAYA: A displeased Malaysian Bar member took to the YouTube to demand that the council explain in its interim report what caused the violence during Bersih 3.0.
In the seven-minute video uploaded three days ago, lawyer Ranjit Singh Dhillon said Malaysian Bar president Lim Chee Wee had “shot himself in the foot” through contradictory statements in the report regarding police provocation by protesters.
“He (Lim) is the leader of a professional body, and in the space of 26 pages he is contradicting himself.
“Law is technical jargon. We owe a duty to the public. Paint the full picture, let them judge,” he said of the interim report.
He noted that in the early part of the report, the Bar Council said that the police were not provoked but towards the end of the report it said the police were provoked.
Ranjit expressed surprise that Lim had kept mum about what had triggered the violence in Dataran Merdeka during the rally, claiming that despite the barricade breach, police remained patient until the protesters were 50m past it.
The council’s interim report was based on observations by 78 council volunteers who stationed themselves at six positions on the ground during the April 28 sit-in protest.
It had highlighted that police brutality at the recent rally was at a higher level than its predecessor, Bersih 2.0.
Ranjit noted that freedom of assembly in every democratic, civilised country had to have its limitations.
When comparing both rallies, he outlined that in Bersih 2.0 protesters had marched to Stadium Merdeka even when the authorities denied them a permit to assemble there.
However, the Bersih 3.0 organisers asked for Dataran Merdeka but were offered Stadium Merdeka by the authorities.
He agreed that Bersih was a gathering of NGOs, but said that in every such gathering there would be political leaders who would work arm-in-arm with the organisers.
Majority of Malaysians are getting very irritated with the Bar Council. Probably, majority of the lawyers too. They should come out in the open and voice their discern, aloud. Like a lawyer always firmly uphold, “The Constitution is the Supreme Law”. Bar Council’s stance on BERSIH 3.0, is clearly against that.
“For the sake of Malaysia, we are the only professional legal body they could count on. Don’t let us down”. The message is clear.