Learning the law the wrong way
ANYONE wanting to study
law is always advised to read
Professor Glanville Willams’
book Learning the Law.
The book, which was first
published in 1945, continues to
introduce students to the skills
needed to study law effectively.
It is an easy to read, accessible,
and down-to-earth book. No,
today’s column is not a book
review but it has got to do with
a lot of issues which involve
the law, law students and issues
of public interest.
Just when we decided to close the files on
the infamous palace in Port Klang built by its
former state assemblyman Datuk Zakaria Mat
Deros, his name has been resurrected in the
form of an answer to an academic question
which read: Provide the land reforms/controversies
in Penang, Selangor, Perak and Kedah.
For purposes of easy reading, it is reproduced
below.
If you thought it was the work of a lower
secondary student, you are mistaken. This is
the handiwork of a law student in a public
university in Selangor. The frightening fact is
that in two or three years, he could be standing
up in a court of law appearing on your behalf
in a civil case or defending someone accused
of murder. He could also be the man who will
be perusing the million-ringgit contract documents
on behalf of the government.
If the “England is not that powerderful”
enough to send you into a fit of anger and disgust
or for that matter into laughter until you have a belly-ache,
the wannabe-lawyer’s
knowledge of issues is zilch. He
just picked his facts out of thin
air or was relying on ill-founded
rumours. He needn’t have pored
over voluminous books or law
reports because the Zakaria case
never went to court. On the contrary,
for more than a year from
October 2007, his name made
headlines in every newspaper
in the country. A Google search
would have provided enough
material than what was not only
concocted but also misleading.
But this was not the only answer
script that was sighted. We saw, read
and digested scores of them, all of
which had two common denominations
– atrocious language and wrong
information. Some answers provided
are unprintable because if they are
reproduced, this writer and the publisher
may be prosecuted under the
Sedition Act. The knowledge of current
affairs and issues is so
shallow and perhaps the
minds of some of them
have been so twisted
that they cannot think
rationally. They appear
to see issues through
narrow-minded thinking
and their answers
border on racism
suggesting that land is
being stolen from one
community and given to
another. How they arrived
at such conclusions is beyond us but
we can assume that they relied on
friends or family, who were equally
ill-informed. Almost every student offered
racial connotations or had racial
undertones in their answers.
The sad end to this saga is that the
examiner who failed this student and
17 others was ordered to re-mark and
make them pass. She refused and is
now on the streets because her conscience
refused to allow her to do so.
She had set her own grading criteria
which was approved by the university
and stuck to it. One student got just
four marks out of a possible 60 and for
doing her job religiously, the examiner
was labelled a “pengkhianat” (traitor).
We have been told that the dean of the
faculty took it upon himself to change
the marks. This student will be one
of the many who, in a few years, will
be admitted to the Bar because there
seem to be different sets of criteria
for the various institutions of higher
learning.
Last Sunday, Higher Education
Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled
Nordin urged private universities to
focus on improving their research
capabilities and provide more postgraduate
opportunities to emerge as
world-class institutions.
“Private universities should have
clear long-term goals to reach further
heights if Malaysia is to be a regional
educational hub. The ministry’s role
is to facilitate that growth and ensure
that quality is maintained,” the Star
quoted him as saying.
But what about public universities,
Datuk? Isn’t anyone checking on the
quality? Doesn’t anyone pick answer
scripts at random to review them? Are
we lowering the standards so that we
can claim to have more graduates? Are
we creating “sure-to-pass” universities
because we want to be recorded in that
book as the “country with the highest
number of graduates”? And then, we
go around moaning and groaning
about local graduates not being able
to find employment.
Why are courses being offered to
students who are not proficient in the
medium of instruction? Why can’t
students be first sent for a foundation
course in the language before being
allowed to take the course proper? Are
we in a hurry to produce less-than competent
people?
Now back to the Williams. Will the
dean or someone in charge of the law
faculties in our universities make this
book compulsory reading for students
before they even attend the first lecture?
But knowing our system, they
would provide the book allowance
which would finally end up at some
warung! On a more serious note, the
book covers almost all areas including
methods of study, technical terms, case
law technique, interpretation of statutes
and research. Besides, nothing is more
educational than keeping abreast by
reading the newspapers everyday. As
students in UK, we were up-to-date on
legal issues by reading the law reports
in The Times but the other sections of
the newspaper kept us informed of
the events and happenings around the
world. If only the university students
had read newspapers, they won’t be
giving silly and wrong analysis of local
issues.
R. Nadeswaran graduated with a law
degree at 46. After 12 years, he is as
passionate about education as he was
when he started. He is editor (special
and investigative reporting). Feedback:
citizen-nades@thesundaily.com
