Judicial CommissionerYA Tuan George Varughese assisted College Of Law Sydney promote Malaysian law masters program that did not have the approval of the Malaysian Qualification Agency ; provided no explanation after College suddenly closed its office in Malaysia, and its Malaysian Masters website vanished

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Extract from the College of Law-Bar Council brochure 

As reported on a related blog, Malaysian Judicial Commissioner  Yang Arif Tuan George Varughese has continued to maintain his silence on the matter of his dealings with Australia's College Of Law
 

Among the dealings is Varughese's  assistance extended the  College Of Law Sydney in its promotion of a   Malaysian law masters program  while he was President of the Malaysian Bar Council. 

There were a  number of problems with that program. First, it did not have the approval  of the Malaysian Qualification Agency. It is not listed on the Malaysian Qualifications Register.  

Additionally The Bar Council itself was not at the time of promotion, and still is not, approved by the Ministry Of Education to provide tertiary courses of any kind, 

The program is referred to in the past tense for it seems to have vanished, just after launch , as has  the College Of Law's director in Malaysia, Peter Tritt. Its office in Malaysia has been closed, and the phone numbers provided in the LLM brochure are no longer answered by anyone from or representing the College Of Law (see story below). 

Bar Council education ‘JV’ must be clarified

By Editor , in Scandal on July 19, 2019 . Tagged width: College of Law , Fareed Gafoor , Malaysian Bar

KUALA LUMPUR, July 19 – The Malaysian Bar Council launched its first education venture, a LLM in Malaysian Legal Practise (LLM), last year in collaboration with the College Of Law Australia.

The LLM does not seem to have the approval of Malaysia’s Legal Professional Qualifying Board (LPQB) but the website for the course, which is hosted in Australia, prominently displays the Bar Council crest.

The crest has not been used before to promote a course of study, and queries put to Bar Council President Fareed Gafoor about the use of the crest have been acknowledged but remain unanswered.

NMT has however sighted an email from Fareed dated Friday, May 24, 2019 with regards the LLM and the use of the crest where he states:

Dear Rajen,

We can’t remain silent on this.

Abdul Fareed Bin Abdul Gafoor

Sent from my iPad

It is understood that “Rajen” refers to  Rajen Devaraj, Chief Executive Officer of the Bar Council Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur.

The Bar has remained silent for nearly 2 months since.

Key person suddenly retired during extensive query

The College of Law used to be represented in Malaysia by its Director, Peter Tritt. Tritt have been queried extensively about the LLM and about the College’s business in Malaysia but has refused to provide answers. Tritt has been based in Kuala Lumpur since 2017 but announced on Friday that he had “retired” from the College on 30 June 2019.

It is understood that Tritt has forwarded queries sent him to his head office in Sydney and hence it appears that Tritt is under orders from his Chief Executive, Neville Carter, to remain silent.

Questionable advertising claims?

In advertising on the College’s website Carter has claimed that he had established a Professional Legal Training course for Malaysian Law students seeking admission to practise in Malaysia. There seems to be no evidence of such a course, or of any national level training course for the existing Certificate of Legal Practise.

Carter has also claimed to have produced the “inaugural” Handbook in Legal Practise for Malaysia, in the late 80s. A search of the main law libraries in Malaysia directed by the Chief Registrar, Federal Court Malaysia, has not found any such handbook.

He has also claimed to have, during that time to have identified and addressed “gaps” in Malaysian legal practise, but not even those in practice during that period and since have ever heard of him. Nor are senior practitioners aware of  “gaps” that needed that to be addressed by external consultants.

As CEO of the College Carter  has ultimate responsibility for the College’s Malaysian operation headed by Tritt and variously named the “College Of Law Asia Pacific” and the “College Of Law Asia”. A search by NMT has not revealed any entities registered under those names in Malaysia or in Australia, not even a foreign entities registered to conduct business in Malaysia.

Meanwhile the College, in collaboration with the Bar Council continues to sell its LLM and other courses in Malaysia, deriving a fee income from Malaysian courses.

-NMT

Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 6:18 PM 

While awaiting his re-admission to practise in Malaysia, former lawyer VK Lingam began dealing in antiques in Cardiff.........and then there is the matter of "My brother Dato V. Kanagalingam" reported on Rocky's Bru

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

It has been previously reported on this blog that the  VK Lingam appeal an opportunity to eradicate the Malaysian justice system of the Lingam satellites. Meanwhile, it appears that Lingam has started a business dealing in antiques in Cardiff. See UK Companies House records at:

WESTMINSTER ANTIQUES LIMITED

TO BE READ WITH 

Sunday, November 18, 2007

My brother Dato V. Kanagalingam

Own brother lodges 2 police reports against VK Lingam. Electrician Thirunama Karasu a/l Kandar Velluppillai, 50, is the brother of V.K Lingam, the lawyer in the controversial video clip that Anwar Ibrahim showed the world in September.

In March, six months before the video, he had lodged two police reports with two police stations against his brother. The first report was lodged with the Kelana Jaya police station on 16 March 2007 and the second with the Brickfields police station three days later, on 19 March 2007.

Lawyer-politician Wee Choo Keong made public the police reports for the first time at a lunchtime media conference today. The revelation has thrown even more dirt on the country's beleaguered judiciary and is expected to pile on the pressure for sweeping reforms.

Juicy details contained in the two police reports include:

1) allegations of corruption involving Lingam and several judges, including former CJ Eusoff Chin, former AG Mohtar Abdullah, former IGP Rahim Noor, and judges Mohtar Sidin, Low Hop Bing, and K.L Rekraj.

2) a dinner hosted by Lingam at his home for some judges and their wives and children

3) gifts and cheques allegedly for some judges

4) the former IGP's phone bills

5) claims of huge transfers of money to accounts in London following a tip-off of an ACA raid

6) alleged visits to the former Chief Justice's home

Wee: "The allegations contained in the Kelana Jaya Police Report No: 002187/07 dated 19-03-2007 by Mr Karasu were extremely serious by any standard one would like to set. I am most surprised that almost 8 months have elapsed after the said police report has been lodged and there was no positive action taken ...."

He said he will be writing to the Police to ask about the status of investigation, if any, into the reports. He will also submit copies of the reports to the Bar Council and the Acting Chief of Justice.

Over 30 journalists and bloggers covered the media conference.

Read the police reports, in full:
Police Report No 1: He Ain't Heavy ...
Police Report No 2: He's My Brother.

Berejiklian, Maguire's keys,and her security clearance

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

The SMH reported on 23 October 2020: 

Ms Berejiklian on Friday gave a written answer to a question on notice from One Nation leader Mark Latham, who asked during Thursday's question time why she "did not make mention of the fact that Daryl Maguire had a key to her north shore home?"

The Premier wrote in response: "It would be inappropriate to comment on these matter while an ICAC investigation is underway."

Mr Maguire is being investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption for using his position as the member for Wagga Wagga for his own financial benefit between 2012 and 2018. The commission has heard revelations Mr Maguire was in a secret relationship with the Premier while he was brokering property deals.

The ICAC inquiry does not concern Gladys, as her supporters and she keep reminding us.However, this evasion adds to the other instances of evasion before the ICAC inquiry where she appeared as a witness.

Her tactics may help avoid any adverse finding by ICAC, and any possible breach of any relevant laws.

However, as premier Berejiklian has to maintain a high (if not the highest) level security clearance. Being granted and then maintaining that clearance requires a level of disclosure that is often obscured by the rules of evidence applicable in Australian courts and other quasi-judicial bodies.

The above adds to information in the public domain which would justify withdrawing Berejiklian's security clearance. She cannot be premier without that high level clearance.  

VK Lingam appeal an opportunity to eradicate the Malaysian justice system of the Lingam satellites

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

 VK Lingam's appeal against the Malaysian Bar Council's decision to disbar is understood to be heard soon. The appeal provides an important avenue for the eradication from the Malaysian justice. system of the Lingam satellites, primarily the network of law firms and lawyers who did his work. The decisions of former Sessions Courts judge Saufee Afandi is a good place to start. 

Saufee passed away in 2015 but never protested anything this writer had to say about his less than glorious career.

TO BE READ WITH 

Lawyer banned over ‘fixing judges’ phone call appeals to return to practice

V Anbalagan

 -

May 5, 2020 3:55 PM

1

VK Lingam made headlines in 2007 after a leaked video showing him fixing judicial appointments in a phone call with a senior judge.

PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has fixed Nov 5 to hear an appeal by former lawyer VK Lingam to return to practice after he was barred for fixing judicial appointments.

Lawyer R Thayalan said the date was agreed upon today following case management before deputy registrar Nik Serene Nik Hashim.

“A new date was decided after an earlier scheduled appeal hearing on March 10 was vacated when a judge disqualified herself,” he told FMT.

On May 22, 2018, then High Court judge Kamaludin Md Said dismissed Lingam’s appeal against a 2015 decision by the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board to strike off his name from the roll.

Lingam was implicated in a judicial fixing scandal by a 2007 royal commission of inquiry (RCI), following the release of a widely circulated video clip featuring him purportedly discussing promotions and factionalism among senior judges with then chief justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.

The RCI panel had recommended that action for misconduct be taken against him, Ahmad Fairuz, former chief justice Eusoff Chin, tycoon Vincent Tan, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and former minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.

The board had earlier affirmed a committee’s decision in finding Lingam guilty of involvement in judicial fixing, and barred him from practising law.

In his appeal, Lingam claimed the video evidence used against him during the inquiry was not authentic and might have been taken out of context.

Lingam has been out of Malaysia for more than eight years and is currently believed to be in the United States.

In 2017, he was sentenced to jail six months in absentia by the Federal Court for contempt, for claiming that a Federal Court bench had plagiarised its written grounds in delivering judgment on a civil case eight years earlier.

In that case, another lawyer, TC Nayagam, and 24 family members and directors of Kian Joo Can Factory Bhd pleaded guilty to showing disrespect to the court and were fined a total of RM2.15 million

Shades of China type censorship in Australia: Australia's proposed adult cyber abuse laws can be used by politicians to avoid scrutiny : The example of NSW AG Mark Speakman & his officers demonstrates how scrutiny of political, public service misconduct can be evaded by crying harassment, intimidation

by Ganesh Sahathevan
\

Minister warns on dangers of abuse
Federal cyber safety minister Paul Fletcher said the
government was moving to a new regime on adult cyber abuse

Australia's proposed "adult cyber  abuse" laws will allow the Commonwealth ESafety Commissioner to order platforms such as Facebook to remove postings that are deemed to be "unsafe". The Federal cyber safety minister Paul Fletcher says he must do to ensure that the Internet is "safe" for adults.

However, given the example of say Section 18C of the Anti-Discrimination Act and other laws that are intended to keep citizens "safe" these proposed laws are more likely than not to be used to censor and avoid scrutiny.

As this writer has reported  the Attorney General Of NSW Mark Speakman and his officers at the NSW Department Of Justice continue to evade scrutiny with regards their  issuance of licenses to award law degrees and diplomas, by claiming that they were harassed, threatened and intimidated by this writer's queries. The queries have since included Mr Speakman's refusal to correct documents he has tabled in the NSW Parliament which are known to be incomplete ,and false.

TO BE READ WITH

Sunday, July 21, 2019

Malaysia will investigate NSW AG and LPAB oversight of the College Of Law: College's Malaysian business removes protective mantle; likely to further expose LPAB Annual report exclusions

by Ganesh Sahathevan

by Ganesh Sahathevan


The story below was published by the well connected Malaysian investigative new site New Malaysia Times. An investigation by all the relevant Malaysian authorities can be expected, and that will involve a forensic examination of the College Of Law Sydney.

Questions about the College's activities in Malaysia have been put by this writer to the two parties ultimately responsible for regulating the College's activities , the Attorney General NSW Mark Speakman and the Legal Professional Admission Board NSW.

The queries have been met with accusations, by the LPAB and the AG of harassment , threat and intimidation by this writer of the College's management.They have gone so far as to object to the Attorney General Malaysia being informed about the  College's activities in Malaysia
They have also excluded from the LPAB's 2018 and earlier Annual Reports , which the AG tables in the NSW Parliament complaints against the College and its management; and in particular statements on the official record that they have made in support of the College.

All the above is  now likely to be investigated in Malaysia.
END

Bar Council education ‘JV’ must be clarified

By Editor , in Scandal on July 19, 2019 . Tagged width: College of Law , Fareed Gafoor , Malaysian Bar

KUALA LUMPUR, July 19 – The Malaysian Bar Council launched its first education venture, a LLM in Malaysian Legal Practise (LLM), last year in collaboration with the College Of Law Australia.

The LLM does not seem to have the approval of Malaysia’s Legal Professional Qualifying Board (LPQB) but the website for the course, which is hosted in Australia, prominently displays the Bar Council crest.

The crest has not been used before to promote a course of study, and queries put to Bar Council President Fareed Gafoor about the use of the crest have been acknowledged but remain unanswered.

NMT has however sighted an email from Fareed dated Friday, May 24, 2019 with regards the LLM and the use of the crest where he states:

Dear Rajen,

We can’t remain silent on this.

Abdul Fareed Bin Abdul Gafoor

Sent from my iPad

It is understood that “Rajen” refers to  Rajen Devaraj, Chief Executive Officer of the Bar Council Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur.

The Bar has remained silent for nearly 2 months since.

Key person suddenly retired during extensive query

The College of Law used to be represented in Malaysia by its Director, Peter Tritt. Tritt have been queried extensively about the LLM and about the College’s business in Malaysia but has refused to provide answers. Tritt has been based in Kuala Lumpur since 2017 but announced on Friday that he had “retired” from the College on 30 June 2019.

It is understood that Tritt has forwarded queries sent him to his head office in Sydney and hence it appears that Tritt is under orders from his Chief Executive, Neville Carter, to remain silent.

Questionable advertising claims?

In advertising on the College’s website Carter has claimed that he had established a Professional Legal Training course for Malaysian Law students seeking admission to practise in Malaysia. There seems to be no evidence of such a course, or of any national level training course for the existing Certificate of Legal Practise.

Carter has also claimed to have produced the “inaugural” Handbook in Legal Practise for Malaysia, in the late 80s. A search of the main law libraries in Malaysia directed by the Chief Registrar, Federal Court Malaysia, has not found any such handbook.

He has also claimed to have, during that time to have identified and addressed “gaps” in Malaysian legal practise, but not even those in practice during that period and since have ever heard of him. Nor are senior practitioners aware of  “gaps” that needed that to be addressed by external consultants.

As CEO of the College Carter  has ultimate responsibility for the College’s Malaysian operation headed by Tritt and variously named the “College Of Law Asia Pacific” and the “College Of Law Asia”. A search by NMT has not revealed any entities registered under those names in Malaysia or in Australia, not even a foreign entities registered to conduct business in Malaysia.

Meanwhile the College, in collaboration with the Bar Council continues to sell its LLM and other courses in Malaysia, deriving a fee income from Malaysian courses.

-NMT

See also

AG NSW justifies exclusion of foreign regulatory risks from Dept of Justice annual reports on the basis that he was threatened, intimidated by the information:The matter of Top Group has implications for all regulators (including the NSW Law Soc)

What are journalists to do when judges embarrass themselves: Proposed contempt laws have no place in a world where judges insist on involving themselves in public debate

by Ganesh Sahathevan



The Australian's Nicola Berkovic has reported that "journalists could be jailed for ­articles found to undermine public confidence in the courts or ­interfere with a person’s right to a fair trial, under new contempt of court laws proposed in ­Victoria."

Contempt of court laws were formulated at a time when judges understood that they must remain aloof of the people they judge, and their debates. This is no longer the case, and as Tim Blair described not too long ago, even chief justices are not able to restrain themselves (see story below). The problem is endemic. 

Given the circumstances journalists can never be sure when something said or written might be considered to have undermined  public confidence in some judicial officer and his or her court. Todays judges seem not likely to want to confine themselves to their courts and judgements. Hence  in keeping with these progressive times contempt laws are best diluted, not affirmed, and eventually forgotten.

TO BE READ WITH

Chief Justice Tom Bathurst will save us from ourselves

Tim Blair Blog Posts

WHY BOTHER WITH ELECTIONS?

Tim Blair, The Daily Telegraph

February 2, 2017 5:22am

Judges know best. They are more knowledgeable and caring than politicians. They are also more knowledgeable and caring than the voters who elect those politicians.

We know this because the state’s leading judge, Tom Bathurst, says so.

In a speech to the Opening of Law Term dinner, Chief Justice Bathurst declared it was the judiciary and not the government who can be relied upon to promote fairness and equality. Left to our own devices, and without the soothing touch of all-wise judges, Australians would apparently descend into rampant racism.

“It should give us pause that one of the most serious threats to the rule of law in Australia was grounded in xenophobia,” Chief Justice Bathurst said, much in the manner of his predecessor Jim Spigelman.

The chief justice’s speech will no doubt please that sector of our community which is essentially suspicious of and distrusting towards the majority of Australians. Bathurst reinforced this notion with a line about promoting equality, fairness and the rule of law “in spite of popular sentiment”.

Poor old popular sentiment always cops a bashing from the we-know-better brigade. This is frequently ill-considered. After all, popular sentiment led to stopping the people smuggling trade in our region – and therefore ending a murderous practice that cost around 1200 lives at sea during Labor’s six years of power.

Interestingly, the legal fraternity – those promoters of fairness and equality – even now forms a large part of the movement dedicated to ending Australia’s life-saving border security operations.

Chief Justice Bathurst reached all the way back to 1888 for one example of the judiciary’s wisdom over popular opinion. During that year the NSW Government ordered police to stop Chinese passengers getting off a ship which had docked in Sydney Harbour, only for the government to be eventually overruled.

The chief justice sees parallels between the events of 1888 and Australia’s current mood, at least in terms of then-NSW premier Sir Henry Parkes’s comments at the time.

Sir Henry is presently unable to respond, having been dead for more than 100 years, but we would submit that Australia has changed a great deal during the intervening period. We are now a multicultural, tolerant, educated and thoughtful people who are quite capable of seeking fair outcomes without being bossed into them.

If Chief Justice Bathurst would like to have more of a say in the state’s affairs, he is welcome to run for elected office.

Vic Chief Justice Anne Ferguson orders inquiry into sexual harassment within court system: Compare, contrast with NSW CJ Bathurst who has deflected blame to NSW Sup Crt administration. Culture of cover-up requires intervention by Premier Berejiklian

by Ganesh Sahathevan


The Victorian Courts reaction to allegations of sexual harassment as reported by SBS and others: 

Harassment in Victorian courts will be examined in an inquiry announced by the state government on Monday, after accusations were levelled at former High Court justice Dyson Heydon.

Former Victorian human rights commissioner Helen Szoke will lead the review, initiated jointly by Supreme Court Chief Justice Anne Ferguson and the Courts Council.

Compare the above to the reaction from the Chief Justice of NSW ,Tom Bathurst. The Guardian reported: 

The (Supreme Court NSW)  said in a statement on Tuesday 23 June: “Chief Justice Bathurst has confirmed that since his appointment in 2011, he had not been made aware of any claims or complaints of sexual harassment at the court.

There is a culture of secrecy and cover-up within the NSW legal system which can only be dealt with properly if Premier Berejiklian orders an inquiry such as the one ordered by Victorian Chief Justice Anne Ferguson.

TO BE READ WITH 

TO BE READ WITH 

Saturday, July 11, 2020

Sexual harassment cover-up : AG Speakman not investigating Supreme Court NSW, despite CJ Bathurst deflecting blame to Supreme Court administration

By Ganesh Sahathevan
NSW LPAB Chairman Bathurst who granted Top Group its history making right to issue LLB degrees will stay in job till 2023: Bathurst CJ will be around to swear in Top Group law grads as officers of His Honour's Court.



In response to the allegations of sexual harassment against Dyson Heydon QC NSW Attorney General Mark Speakman announced that he had asked the Department Of Justice to investigate 11 key terms of reference, following concerns incidents of harassment were going unreported and unheard in the legal profession.

He did not however direct an investigation of the Supreme Court Of NSW, and its own administration. As reported below, the NSW Supreme Court and its administrators are the real centre of power in the NSW legal system. The Department Of Justice oversees it, but it is, in effect, a separate universe. The Court and its administrators enjoy, if not presume (without impunity) the airs and privileges reserved for judges. 

Complaints of sexual and other harassment against judges if reported are likely to be reported to Supreme Court staff, who are all ultimately under the supervision of the Executive Director and Principal Registrar at Supreme Court of NSW.The Executive Director and Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court NSW is in charge of recruiting the Executive Officer of the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board (NSW LPAB) and as a result can influence who can or cannot be admitted to practise law in NSW and Australia. He or she can also as a result influence who can or cannot offer law degrees and PLT courses in NSW. 

As reported below the Chief Justice NSW Tom Bathurst has been careful to deflect blame away from himself and toward his administration ie the NSW Supreme Court and its administrators. Mr Speakman's failure to direct an investigation of the NSW Supreme Court itself is difficult to fathom.

TO BE READ WITH 

Harassment complaints: Chief Justice Bathurst deflects blame to Supreme Court's staff including, associates, NSW LPAB Executive Officers and other gatekeepers-junior judges may also be left to face accusations of inaction on their own

by Ganesh Sahathevan

                                           The minister ultimately responsible for all of this is
                                            ultimately the AG Mark Speakman SC
           

The Guardian reported: 
The (Supreme Court NSW)  said in a statement on Tuesday 23 June: “Chief Justice Bathurst has confirmed that since his appointment in 2011, he had not been made aware of any claims or complaints of sexual harassment at the court.

As noted on this blog, the Chief Justice has been a little too circumspect in his statement: 

Chief Justice Bathurst not made aware of "sexual harassment at the court ": Carefully worded statement suggests sexual harassment outside court, and behaviour not amounting to sexual harassment but which may be construed to be threatening, intimidating

Apart from the above the statement has also the effect of deflecting any blame from the Chief Justice personally; he has stated, again rather too carefully, he "had not been made aware of any claims or complaints of sexual harassment at the court". 

Consequently the Chief Justice's official gatekeepers, including  his associates and his executive officers at the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board and the Judicial Commission NSW , are now exposed to accusations of ignoring if not hindering complaints of sexual harassment. Similarly the upper reaches of the NSW Supreme Court administration, who decide who works at the NSW LPAB, and thus have power to determine who may or may not practise law in NSW, and in Australia. 

The Chief Justice's subordinate judges are also exposed.

The Australian's Nicola Berkovic reported on  JUNE 27, 2020:

........a NSW Supreme Court judge was told Heydon had made unwanted advances towards one of its young female employees two years ago but did not take any action Dhanya Mani, 26, was working as a tipstaff to NSW Supreme Court judge Guy Parker in 2018 when she told him about alleged harassment by Heydon.

Parker informed NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst only this week of Mani’s allegation

It is true that we do not know from the above when precisely in the week ending June 27 2020 Mr Justice Guy Parker informed Chief Justice Bathurst of Mani’s allegation. He may have done so on or after Tuesday 23 June 2020, when Bathurst issued his press release denying any knowledge of any " claims or complaints of sexual harassment at the court." Regardless, the denial shifts blame to Justice Parker. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Dyson Heydon sexual harassment revelations are also matters for the NSW Auditor General Margaret Crawford: reports suggest NSW LPAB, NSW Legal Services Council did not disclose complaints in their Annual Reports; NSW LPAB has a history of interfering with the paper trail

by Ganesh Sahathevan




Dhanya Mani, one of Dyson Heydon’s accusers. (Picture by Adam Yip, published on The Australian website.) 
Mani's complaints should have been reported in the NSW LPAB and NSW Legal Services Commission annual reports.


The Australian's Nicola Berkovic reported on  JUNE 27, 2020:
........a NSW Supreme Court judge was told Heydon had made unwanted advances towards one of its young female employees two years ago but did not take any action Dhanya Mani, 26, was working as a tipstaff to NSW Supreme Court judge Guy Parker in 2018 when she told him about alleged harassment by Heydon.

Parker informed NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst only this week of Mani’s allegations.

The court says Mani did not ask Parker to take the matter any further, but she told The Australian that she had hoped when she raised the matter he would do something about it.

Bathurst has now asked the state’s judicial commission to prepare an education program for judges on what to do if an allegation is made. The court says judges were not previously trained on the issue because it was generally expected they would have been educated in their previous careers.

The problem for Bathurst (who is also Chairman of the Legal Profession Admission Board) , and for Parker, is this: even if the complaint was not progressed,  it should have been reported to the NSW Parliament (and the public) in the relevant NSW LPAB and NSW Legal Services Council  annual reports, as an operational matter. Non-disclosure has caused an underestimation of operational risks. This should be evident from the reports this week that leave no doubt as to the magnitude of the risks. Indeed, the reports suggest that there are systemic risks that have been allowed to fester. 

Both organisations, but in particular the NSW LPAB  have a history of making incomplete disclosures.  As reported by this writer the NSW LPAB has recently gone so far as to misstate the facts of a landmark decision of the NSW Supreme Court  in what appears to be an attempt to deflect questions about its failure to investigate and report complaints against the College Of Law, which it certifies as a PLT provider.  Evidence has also been provided of what appears to be an attempt to confect a paper trail in order to deflect questions about the NSW LPAB's own conduct.

These are all matters for the NSW Auditor General Margaret Crawford, who must now conduct a full and complete investigation into all and any complaints of sexual harassment, and ensure that NSW LPAB and NSW Legal Council Annual Reports are amended to reflect those complaints.

TO BE READ WITH 

Sunday, July 21, 2019

Malaysia will investigate NSW AG and LPAB oversight of the College Of Law: College's Malaysian business removes protective mantle; likely to further expose LPAB Annual report exclusions

by Ganesh Sahathevan

by Ganesh Sahathevan


The story below was published by the well connected Malaysian investigative new site New Malaysia Times. An investigation by all the relevant Malaysian authorities can be expected, and that will involve a forensic examination of the College Of Law Sydney.

Questions about the College's activities in Malaysia have been put by this writer to the two parties ultimately responsible for regulating the College's activities , the Attorney General NSW Mark Speakman and the Legal Professional Admission Board NSW.

The queries have been met with accusations, by the LPAB and the AG of harassment , threat and intimidation by this writer of the College's management.They have gone so far as to object to the Attorney General Malaysia being informed about the  College's activities in Malaysia
They have also excluded from the LPAB's 2018 and earlier Annual Reports , which the AG tables in the NSW Parliament complaints against the College and its management; and in particular statements on the official record that they have made in support of the College.

All the above is  now likely to be investigated in Malaysia.
END

Bar Council education ‘JV’ must be clarified

By Editor , in Scandal on July 19, 2019 . Tagged width: College of Law , Fareed Gafoor , Malaysian Bar

KUALA LUMPUR, July 19 – The Malaysian Bar Council launched its first education venture, a LLM in Malaysian Legal Practise (LLM), last year in collaboration with the College Of Law Australia.

The LLM does not seem to have the approval of Malaysia’s Legal Professional Qualifying Board (LPQB) but the website for the course, which is hosted in Australia, prominently displays the Bar Council crest.

The crest has not been used before to promote a course of study, and queries put to Bar Council President Fareed Gafoor about the use of the crest have been acknowledged but remain unanswered.

NMT has however sighted an email from Fareed dated Friday, May 24, 2019 with regards the LLM and the use of the crest where he states:

Dear Rajen,

We can’t remain silent on this.

Abdul Fareed Bin Abdul Gafoor

Sent from my iPad

It is understood that “Rajen” refers to  Rajen Devaraj, Chief Executive Officer of the Bar Council Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur.

The Bar has remained silent for nearly 2 months since.

Key person suddenly retired during extensive query

The College of Law used to be represented in Malaysia by its Director, Peter Tritt. Tritt have been queried extensively about the LLM and about the College’s business in Malaysia but has refused to provide answers. Tritt has been based in Kuala Lumpur since 2017 but announced on Friday that he had “retired” from the College on 30 June 2019.

It is understood that Tritt has forwarded queries sent him to his head office in Sydney and hence it appears that Tritt is under orders from his Chief Executive, Neville Carter, to remain silent.

Questionable advertising claims?

In advertising on the College’s website Carter has claimed that he had established a Professional Legal Training course for Malaysian Law students seeking admission to practise in Malaysia. There seems to be no evidence of such a course, or of any national level training course for the existing Certificate of Legal Practise.

Carter has also claimed to have produced the “inaugural” Handbook in Legal Practise for Malaysia, in the late 80s. A search of the main law libraries in Malaysia directed by the Chief Registrar, Federal Court Malaysia, has not found any such handbook.

He has also claimed to have, during that time to have identified and addressed “gaps” in Malaysian legal practise, but not even those in practice during that period and since have ever heard of him. Nor are senior practitioners aware of  “gaps” that needed that to be addressed by external consultants.

As CEO of the College Carter  has ultimate responsibility for the College’s Malaysian operation headed by Tritt and variously named the “College Of Law Asia Pacific” and the “College Of Law Asia”. A search by NMT has not revealed any entities registered under those names in Malaysia or in Australia, not even a foreign entities registered to conduct business in Malaysia.

Meanwhile the College, in collaboration with the Bar Council continues to sell its LLM and other courses in Malaysia, deriving a fee income from Malaysian courses.

-NMT

See also

AG NSW justifies exclusion of foreign regulatory risks from Dept of Justice annual reports on the basis that he was threatened, intimidated by the information:The matter of Top Group has implications for all regulators (including the NSW Law Soc)

Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 6:24 PM 

- June 27, 2020