http://www.malaysiakini.com/Column/2001/11/2001113001.php3

Friday November 30

Political quiet, public disquiet - time to choose

CHIAROSCURO
M.G.G. Pillai

1:20pm, Fri: The helter-skelter dissembling in the CLP fiasco is telling. He who should have surfaced early, the de facto law minister Rais Yatim, adds to the general confusion when he asserts the Legal Profession Qualifying Board is both independent and not independent.

On Nov 28, he said an independent body is planned to supervise examinations conducted by the board implying the LPQB is not; in the next breath he says he cannot interfere because it is.

And jumps on his usual high horse: "We cannot afford to allow people to go on saying that this had been happening for a long time...this kind of talk will put us down into the 'longkang' (drain)."

Yet his silence, until now, was just that. He well knew about it; he refused to interfere when some students approached him.

Now he accepts that the rumours had swirled around the examination since its first in 1984. It went undetected for 18 years and would have for years more but for the Malay Mail article.

As usual, the solution only guarantees further problems of this kind. The cabinet is now involved. Why?

Rais now talks of involving the government and professionals in the examination. Why?

But he does not address the central issue: Would this address the integrity of the examinations itself?

Piecemeal tightening

What he proposes is piecemeal tightening of the procedures as they are breached. When what he should is investigate why in every examination in Malaysia - SPM, STPM, CLP, whatever - question papers can be bought, marks adjusted, if not for a fee than with official collusion to have as many of one group pass with flying colours.

This is the root cause of why the LPQB is hoist on its petard. A few rumours would suffice: was not Mr Khalid seconded to the board in 1984 so that as many ITM law graduates could pass it?

When ITM became a university, its graduates did not need to sit for the CLP. But he remained to create an empire of his own. Why was he allowed to?

When there is a hidden agenda, as in this, why blame the board, which in fairness is not involved in this larger political machination, for what happened?

What Rais should fight for is an independent board of such probity, with, as I suggested earlier, enough tension amongst them so that it would discharge its functions as it should.

This may be unacceptable politically but the government must decide if what it wants is political quiet or public disquiet. It is confused about which it wants.

There must be members on the board who would question and challenge every decision, and this means its members should be selected from the wider circle than senior Malay worthies, as the practice now.

It should be looked at not from the angle of ensuring fewer non-Malays make the cut, but that those who pass represent the finest of the crowd rushing to get into a much envied profession.

It is this, not the integrity of the board, that allows not just the director to tamper with the results at every stage. What he did, as the board acknowledged, blatant forgery.

For this to be put right, there must be a sea-change in attitudes. Alas, I cannot see that in this mindless rush to correct a wrong by tinkering with the inessentials.

Much play is made of the integrity of the members of the board. But no mention of the integrity of the director. Or why he was unsupervised all these years.

The government is forced to move swiftly to perfume the stink surrounding the CLP because in years past, it ignored the blatant corruption about it. This practice of 'marking up' and 'marking down' of marks is not unusual in Malaysia or indeed in any examination. Not only in Malaysia.

It is a device to ensure a consistency in marking, and maintain standards, and is not dependent on negotiations with the students. It apparently was here. Which is why the practice is decried now.

Blind eye

In other words, the government closed a blind eye to the blatant departures from the norm at one time because it favoured one group of students, and again when the officials decided to benefit from it.

What Rais should recommend to the cabinet is a detailed look at all professional bodies, best handled by a royal commission or a berriboned body, and opt for a system whose members are chosen for their competence, not for their race.

If selected for the latter, it diminishes its impact even if they are of utmost probity and leaders in their profession. If the appointment is flawed, everything else would break up in due course, as now in the LPQB. What happened cannot be unusual.

Which is why in the changes Rais envisages, the boards should be selected for no reason than to ensure the highest possible standards and recognition; he should also make it compulsory for all law graduates, from local and foreign universities, to sit for the qualifying examinations to enter the profession. And external examiners to oversee the markings.

For it is clear to all that the standards of markings in local universities are not what we are expected to believe.

The CLP examinations have become an excuse to further the rot in the system, and those affected are those who could not study in local universities.

There are too many exceptions to the rule in who would have to sit for the examinations. There should be no exceptions, and all face the same test. Besides shutting the barn door after the horses had long bolted.

What is at stake is more than the public disquiet at the quality of our professionals, but the general cynicism that there is a price for everything. Which is why the CLP debacle is symptomatic of a larger disease.