Luqman's musings

  Lawyers are duty-bound to represent their clients. But they are also officers of the court, sworn to uphold justice. What happens when those duties collide — when a lawyer continues to act despite clear contradictions and even evidence of fraud?

  India has already demonstrated that pensions can be forfeited for corruption and misconduct. In 2025, amendments to the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules made it clear: dismissal for fraud, corruption, or negligence means loss of pension, gratuity, provident fund, and even family pension. Malaysia , however, has had the principle embedded in law since 1980 — Section 3 of the Pensions Act — but has never tested it. This raises a crucial question: why has Malaysia left this provision dormant, and what benefits could accrue if it were finally enforced?

  In Part 6, we examined how disciplinary powers against indebted teachers were left unused, eroding trust in governance . In Part 7, we saw how selective enforcement turned regulations into hollow promises. Part 8 now takes the next step: what happens when misconduct persists for years, even in the face of a High Court order ?

This series begins where a recent LinkedIn reflection left off — on the quiet ways culture is learned, reinforced, and revealed in schools. Leadership protection, daily behaviour, and fairness under pressure matter far more than polished words on paper.

  In Sabah, the push for full implementation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is often framed as a noble struggle for greater autonomy — the right to manage our own affairs, land, immigration, resources, and a fairer share of revenue. Proponents argue we were promised special safeguards when Malaysia was formed, and much of that has been diluted over the decades. But here’s a question many ordinary Sabahans are asking: What is the point of struggling for more autonomy when we struggle with basic service delivery under the autonomy we already have?

My Struggle to File a Complaint Against a Lawyer as a B40 SARA Recipient in Sabah In Malaysia, we often hear that the legal profession is self-regulating and that disciplinary boards exist to protect the public from professional misconduct. But what happens when the very system meant to uphold standards places financial and procedural barriers that effectively silence ordinary citizens — especially those from the B40 group ?

  A parent’s duty vs. a regulator’s duty If I heard any rumour about my children, I would check it out with them immediately. That is basic parental responsibility.   So why should we expect less from a professional disciplinary body whose entire purpose is to protect the public and uphold standards in the legal profession? In March 2023, I sent a detailed complaint to the Sabah Advocates Disciplinary Board (SADB) regarding what I believed was clear misrepresentation by a law firm. Here is what I wrote:

  A striking coincidence: As a former PKR grassroots member sets the ultimate benchmark for success, I finalise my police report to PDRM and IPCC , and prepare to email Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim . This morning, I came across a timely and pointed article in Focus Malaysia titled “Charges against Tun M, Ismail Sabri would mark PMX ’s anti-graft pinnacle”.

  In my last post on April 2, I shared how ordinary Sabahans — especially those in the B40 group like myself who rely on RM100 monthly SARA aid — are effectively priced out of complaining about professional misconduct by lawyers. The RM100 processing fee, printing costs, and the feeling that the system is stacked against us make it almost impossible to seek justice.

  Transparency at What Cost? The recent Focus Malaysia article , “ Transparency at What Cost? ”, raised a critical warning: exposing corruption by compromising sensitive defence information does not strengthen reform—it weakens the nation. Adversaries gain insights into vulnerabilities, and the shield meant to protect citizens is eroded.

  📌 Introduction Between 2003 and 2018, Sabah Development Bank (SDB) approved approximately RM8 billion in loans to companies based in Peninsular Malaysia . Around 95% of these loans were for property development projects in Kuala Lumpur , Selangor , and Johor —far removed from Sabah’s primary development needs. LINK - Daily Express

In Part 4, I wrote about leadership — how silence and deflection erode trust when institutions fail to act. But leadership failures are magnified when the law itself is unequal. That is the inequity I confront here: borrowers in Malaysia do not all live under the same legal horizon. Different statutory regimes mean that the very rules of foreclosure are not applied uniformly.

Visit my book store at  https://payhip.com/LuqmanMichel                                                              🚫 Lawyers and False Documents: Integrity Is Non ‑ Negotiable Imagine this: A client slides an affidavit across the desk and says, “Just file this — no one will know.” The lawyer spots the falsehood immediately. At that moment, the choice is stark: comply and risk professional ruin, or uphold the duty to the court and refuse.

   I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Consult your lawyer for legal advice. ⚖ ️ Legal Case – The Cost of Frivolous Litigation in Sabah In our previous post , we explored how a party may “ win the battle but lose the war .” Today, we turn to a critical feature of Sabah’s civil litigation system : the English rule (“loser pays”), which ensures that the losing party bears the successful party’s reasonable legal costs. This principle applies uniformly across Malaysia, including the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak , and is designed to balance access to justice with deterrence against abuse.

                                                              Disclaimer: This commentary is general in nature and not related to any ongoing case. It is intended for public education and discussion of legal principles, not as commentary on the merits of any specific matter before the courts.   In every courtroom, whether in Washington or Kuala Lumpur , one principle stands above all others: candour to the court . Lawyers may argue fiercely, they may present facts selectively, but they cannot lie. Judges rely on counsel’s word to keep the machinery of justice running. When candor is compromised, credibility collapses.

Time for Malaysia to Embrace Mediation Reforms Like India I wanted to send this email directly to you, YAB Chief Minister, but I've decided against it—my previous emails to you and your ministers have gone unanswered, lost in the shuffle of bureaucracy. Instead, I'm sharing it openly here, in the hope that public visibility will finally spark the dialogue our communities deserve. If this reaches you, great. If not, perhaps it will inspire others to join the call. Subject: Urging Modernization of Mediation for Faster Housing Dispute Resolutions in Sabah . Dear YAB Datuk Seri Panglima Hj Hajiji Haji Noor, 

This is not legal advice; it is general information. I copied the following definition from the internet: Section 94(3) of Malaysia's Legal Profession Act 1976 (LPA) defines "misconduct" for an advocate and solicitor as any professional conduct or omission, anywhere in the world, that constitutes grave impropriety. This definition encompasses a range of actions including criminal convictions, dishonesty, breaches of professional duties to the court, and violations of Bar Council rules on practice and etiquette. The purpose of this definition is to subject lawyers to disciplinary actions, such as striking off the Roll or suspension from practice, by the Advocates & Solicitors Disciplinary Board. Unfortunately, there is no specific Penal Code provision in Malaysia (including Sabah) that directly criminalizes a lawyer prolonging a case for improper purposes. However, such conduct can fall under:

  The above were readers from around the world on 14.8.2025. The orange represents the US followed by yellow for readers from Malaysia.  The chart below if for readers on 30.8.2025.   以上是2025年8月14日来自世界各地的读者。橙色代表美国，其次是黄色代表马来西亚的读者。 下面的图表是2025年8月30日的读者数据。

  Here are extracts from a Malay Mail article dated 31.8.2025 and my thoughts. Every Merdeka, we celebrate political freedom and national identity — flags, parades, and heartfelt pledges. Yet in 2025, another independence is at stake: independence of the mind. …true freedom means the ability to think critically and discern facts from fiction. Have we strengthened our ability to question ideas, or are we letting herd mentality quietly colonise our thinking? 真正的自由意味着能够批判性地思考并辨别事实与虚构。 我们是否增强了质疑观念的能力，还是在让群体心态悄悄地殖民我们的思维？ My thoughts:

  PUTRAJAYA:   Privatisation that ignores governance and accountability risks becoming "robbery by the minute," or what Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim described as "piratisation." LINK Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim says the government must be open to feedback and criticism for the nation to progress. LINK  Here is my open criticism.  Empty Rhetoric in the Face of Bureaucratic Inaction