Talk:Certificate in Legal Practice (Malaysia)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Malaysia.
This project provides a central approach to Malaysia-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
Looking at the annual passing rate of the Certificate of Legal Practice (CLP) examination, it is obvious that there is a quota to limit the number of passes.
Every candidate works hard to pass this examination, knowing very well it is the final hurdle to enter the legal profession after having put in so much effort and spending so much money to pass the foreign LL.B examination.
Every year thousands of local law graduates, almost all who are malays, automatically enter the legal profession.
If the purpose of having the CLP examination is to maintain a high standard, then even the local law graduates should also pass this examination.
Otherwise, upon completion of the foreign LL.B, let us join the local universities for the final year and take the examination together.
Why the double standard?
After numerous attempts at the CLP examination, many candidates are turning to English or Irish Bar examinations, which are conducted fairly and with transparency.
Surprisingly, they would pass these examinations in one sitting. And today, they are excellent practitioners.
Further, the rules for re-sitting the CLP examination are also outrageous. Candidates have to re-sit for all the papers even though they may have failed in only two papers and the examination is conducted only once a year.
Even the rules for professional examinations for doctors, who deal with human lives everyday, are reasonable. If they (doctors) fail, for instance in two papers, they will have to re-sit only for those papers after six months.
Unlike doctors, lawyers always have ample time to conduct research and prepare for their cases.
So, why make the rules for re-sitting the CLP examination so harsh and difficult?
Most candidates have actually passed all the subjects in several sittings.
Therefore, it is baseless to say that those who fail the CLP examination just do not deserve to pass and are just not good enough.
It is also baseless to say that candidates’ answers were sometimes illegible or “totally off the mark”.
If this is true, then prove it by being transparent. Why is there no examiner’s report? Why can’t the papers be re-marked or checked?
Why are the answer scripts reflecting the allocated marks not given? As candidates, we have the right to seek transparency in the marking system.
The indians and chinese, are being marginalised in the legal profession.
[from main article by anon kawaputratok2me 15:05, 25 July 2007 (UTC)]
