Share This

Wednesday, 1 June 2011

Errant lawyers ticked off





By M. MAGESWARI mages@thestar.com.my

KUALA LUMPUR: Seven lawyers were reprimanded by the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board in the first five months of this year following six complaints against them for unbefitting conduct, breach of Legal Profession Act Rules and negligence in handling their cases.

Board chairman Tan Sri Khalid Ahmad Sulaiman told The Star that the disciplinary board only reprimanded the lawyers after finding that they had no intention of cheating their clients or misleading the courts.

“We have even reprimanded senior lawyers for overlooking certain things. “Lawyers must be professional and their client’s interest is paramount to them,” he said.

Khalid said one of the reasons lawyers were reprimanded was failing to respond to the Bar Council and their client’s letters.

“They were reprimanded for unbecoming conduct as advocates and solicitors. “Lawyers who do not attend court proceedings will also be reprimanded,” he added.



Khalid said the board had ticked off senior lawyers for leaving their legal advisers or clerks to deal with certain matters.

“I have told them to keep an eye on their legal advisers and clerks. We told them to be careful next time and not let this happen again.”

He said the board warned the lawyers that they would face severe punishment, including suspension.
Khalid hoped the lawyers, mostly first-time offenders, would not repeat their mistakes.

He said those reprimanded were among the more than 500 lawyers who were investigated by the board after complaints were lodged against them between January and May.

The Star had published an exclusive report yesterday stating that the board had received 538 complaints against lawyers, mostly in Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Johor Baru, in the first five months of the year.

Five were barred from practising, 28 including four Datuks were fined between RM1,000 and RM30,000, while investigations into the other cases are ongoing.

The board receives an average of 900 complaints a year, including criminal breach of trust and breach of solicitor’s ethics.

Former Malaysian Bar president Ragunath Kesavan said complaints against lawyers, mostly for dishonesty involving client’s money, had been forwarded to the board.

“Any (wrongful) transaction involving the client’s accounts is a serious offence. We have lodged complaints against lawyers for dishonesty involving amounts ranging between RM20,000 and RM2mil,” he said.

He added that the board had found the lawyers guilty after investigating the complaints.

Ragunath said the Bar had confidence in the disciplinary proceedings by the board as it was independent.
“It is very important to have public confidence in the legal profession.”

He said the Bar forwarded complaints of dishonesty without any hesitation, although only a small percentage of lawyers were involved in such cases.

Racial divide a myth as racialism is not the cause




Racial divide a myth

by Ajit Singh Jessy 

SCANNING the various websites and the comments from readers, one would think that racialism pervades our society and daily life. It is also made out to appear that we are about to have racial riots and that there is an insurmountable racial divide.

In my view, this is far from the truth and largely exists in the minds of the writers and may, in fact, be reflective of their own racist views and upbringing.

The issue of scholarships and comments by Datuk Seri Mohammed Nazri Abdul Aziz that Ibrahim Ali is a clown and so forth, are twisted to imply that racialism is the cause.

Scholarships, of course, must be offered to those with good academic results, as well as deserving cases, who may not have the best results but need assistance.

I am not aware of any time in our history where scholarships were given automatically to those with the best results only.

Other factors have always been weighed in and it is not possible for scholarships to be given to all.

In the United States, too, at one time, African-Americans were given special consideration in education and jobs. In India, this is widespread, with some so-called backward classes committing suicide to ensure that they are given special privileges in education and that places are reserved for them in institutions of higher learning.

When Nazri said Ibrahim was a clown, he probably meant that Ibrahim should not be taken seriously.

We still go to Malay weddings, kenduri and lunch with our Malay colleagues and they attend the functions of others. We should not make accusations of double standards at the drop of a hat.

Such accusations imply that others should be allowed to make similar sensitive statements. What would be the end result?



Tension and fear. How does this help the cause of nation- building? These racial critics talk about fairness but are blind to the fact that continuous tit for tat does not serve any purpose.

The views of people like Ibrahim should be ignored.

This talk of a threatening racial divide does not exist in our daily life. You can go to any government department, where the Malays form the majority, and yet, they will not attend to a Malay first but to everyone by turn.

I go to a Malay stall for lunch and there is always a long line of customers from all races and yet, the woman will serve you by your turn. She does not ask the Malays to jump queue just because they are of the same race or religion.

So, what are these critics complaining about discrimination being institutionalised?

You can walk down any street and no one will call out by your race but address you politely according to your age or gender, such as adik, kak, pakcik or makcik. You will not find this if there is a racial divide.

My legal firm has Chinese, Malay and Indian staff. I see them going out for lunch together, celebrating birthdays and visiting one another's homes during festivals.

In fact, we feel most at home when we go to some homes for Hari Raya because the family will attend to the non-Malay visitors first and even remove the beef dishes from the table.

This is the reality of multiracial and multireligious Malaysia and the said behaviour reflects how we live together and not accommodate or tolerate one another, as these misinformed racialists will have us believe.

I think it is time for these mischievous and self-appointed experts on racial issues to come down from their ivory towers and lead a normal life, by sincerely intermingling with one and all.

These writers are in fact creating problems by passing off their prejudiced views as those of the majority of Malaysians.

To compound matters, there are former Malaysians who give their opinion about how this country is headed for racial and financial disaster, and their views are given wide circulation through the Internet. While I welcome different views, it is not proper for these ex-citizens to behave as though only they know what is best for our country.

Leave that to us, and please, take care of your adopted country, where you probably cannot even stand for elections and do not have the numbers to make a difference to the election outcome.

AJIT SINGH JESSY
Penang

Tuesday, 31 May 2011

The Renminbi’s Journey to the World

As China's currency becomes more popular internationally, the country will have less need to hold US dollar assets.





BEIJING – Recently, HSBC bank released an upbeat survey predicting that China’s currency, the renminbi (RMB), will become one of three global settlement currencies (alongside the dollar and euro) sometime this year. It seems that the RMB’s internationalization has been progressing without anyone really noticing. The key remaining questions concern whether or not the RMB will become an important international currency anytime soon, and whether it is poised to pose a serious challenge to the US dollar’s domination of the international monetary system.

 
China has made progress in the use of the renminbi (RMB) as a settlement currency [GALLO/GETTY]

An international currency is used and held beyond the issuing country’s borders, and plays the role of unit of account, medium of exchange, and store of value for residents and non-residents alike. Certainly, there are many potential benefits for China to be gained from the RMB’s internationalization:

·        Elimination of exchange-rate risks to which Chinese firms are exposed;
·        Greater funding efficiency for Chinese financial institutions, thus strengthening their competitiveness in global financial markets;
·        A boost to China’s trade with its neighbors, owing to the reduction in transaction costs;
·        Less need for China to hold US dollar assets and risk capital losses on the country’s foreign-exchange reserves;
·        Eventual status as one of the world’s major reserve currencies, which would provide China more freedom to maneuver in domestic and international economic policy.

China’s enthusiasm for RMB internationalization since 2009 partly reflects its frustration with the lack of progress in reforming the international financial architecture, and with the state of regional financial cooperation. Chinese officials believe that RMB internationalization is a way for China to set its own agenda without being overly constrained by external conditions beyond its control.



Thus far, China has made significant progress in the use of the RMB as a settlement currency, in the issuance of RMB-denominated bonds, and in signing currency-swap agreements with foreign central banks. RMB deposits in Hong Kong are growing exponentially.

Despite these achievements, however, RMB internationalization could still easily go awry. For example, various incentives have been provided to encourage enterprises to use the RMB to settle transactions. But, with an undervalued exchange rate and strong expectations for the RMB to appreciate in the future, foreign importers of Chinese products refuse to use the RMB to settle transactions, while foreign exporters are happy to accept RMB. As a result, even with the same trade balance, China ends up with more foreign-exchange reserves, though using the RMB as a settlement currency is supposed to reduce their accumulation.

Indeed, so far, RMB internationalization has shown a clear pattern of asymmetry – and not only as a settlement currency for China’s imports, but not for exports. RMB-denominated bonds meet strong demand, yet non-residents have no great incentive to issue them. And, while foreign lenders are happy to extend RMB loans, they are not welcome by foreign borrowers. Given strong expectations of RMB appreciation, internationalization will inevitably lead to a serious currency mismatch, with possibly detrimental consequences for China’s welfare.

A more fundamental problem for RMB internationalization is what it implies for China’s capital controls. Although the internationalization of a currency is not tantamount to capital-account liberalization, the degree of internationalization is conditional on capital-account liberalization. In fact, internationalization of the RMB has opened a new hole in China’s wall of capital controls. The big increase in RMB deposits in Hong Kong is a case in point.

When a currency endures a prolonged process of one-way appreciation, speculative capital aimed at exchange-rate arbitrage is bound to seek all chances to flow in. Hot money will increase currency appreciation pressure and complicate macroeconomic management. The profit-taking by speculators at the end of the game will lead to huge welfare losses to the recipient country, in this case China.

Fear of hot money was the main reason why China refused to de-peg the RMB from the dollar until July 2005. While China did decide to allow the RMB to appreciate gradually after that, it has relied on capital controls to prevent hot money from flowing in. The controls are leaky, to be sure, but they have worked (so far), which is why China has effectively maintained macroeconomic stability over the years.

The key objective of China’s capital controls is to prevent non-residents from holding domestic RMB-denominated assets that are unrelated to trade and long-term capital flows. But RMB internationalization encourages non-residents to hold more RMBs and RMB-denominated assets. As a result of RMB internationalization, RMB deposits held by Hong Kong residents have reached RMB370 billion ($57 billion), and the amount may reach RMB1 trillion by the end of the year.

One might wonder what difference there is between hot money and RMB deposits held by non-residents. The answer depends on why non-residents hold these deposits. The attraction of the RMB should come from China’s strong economic fundamentals and faith in its economy. If it comes from expectations of RMB appreciation, the success of RMB internationalization can be easily reversed and will cause more problems for China’s monetary authority to solve in the future.

Fortunately, China’s monetary authority has already noticed the subtlety of the distinction between legitimate demand for RMB-denominated assets and hot money. This means that the pace of RMB internationalization could become more measured than international investors have expected.

While internationalization of the RMB is necessary (and inevitable), it should be guided by market principles and pursued in a cautious manner. To get the sequence of policy adjustments right is vital. In any case, the RMB’s path to becoming a truly international currency promises to be a bumpy one.

By Yu Yongding, currently President of the China Society of World Economics, is a former member of the monetary policy committee of the Peoples' Bank of China and former Director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of World Economics and Politics.