A Report on Future Directions of Legal Education in Malaysia

Abstract

In December 2011, the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Education called for a meeting among all Law Deans to discuss on the numerous critics about the standard of local law graduates at public law schools. The meeting was attended by the Deans and Deputy Deans of the schools. At the meeting, the Chairperson, Prof Dr ZaridaHambali, allocated a special fund for the law schools to conduct a study on the future directions of legal education in Malaysia. The research was supposed to take 6 months. However, trying to gather 7 law schools to work on a project was not an easy task. After intensive deliberations and effort to convince all law schools that this was for the betterment of legal education in Malaysia, an official Committee for the first time met on February 2012. The second hurdle was to get the cooperation of legal practitioners to participate in the survey. It took more than 6 months to distribute the questionnaire and after at least two attempts the team managed to get the response approximately 5% of the members of the Bar. Most questionnaires were returned unanswered. The team sent at least 35 students to assist in distributing the questionnaire. In this research we found a common disagreement among law lecturers and practitioners on the scope of their duty, not just in Malaysia but globally. The American Bar Association in the MacCrate report recorded the gap between academia and legal practice thus lead to:"Complaints and recriminations from legal educators and practicing lawyers. The lament of he practising bar is a steady refrain; 'they can’t draft a contract, they can’t write, they’ve ever seen a summon, the professors have never been inside a courtroom'". Law schools offer the traditional responses, "We teach them how to think, we're not trade schools, we're centre of scholarship and learning, practice is best taught by practitioners". Enhancement of legal education as this study will show is not the duty of law schools alone, neither does the law practitioner. Both must cooperate to find the best possible way to resolved the perceived weaknesses in our legal education. This study outlines the academic component at the law school and investigates the students and employers perspective about legal education in Malaysia. The research shows that all law schools are aware on the challenges on legal education and had taken reasonable steps or try to look for possible ways to improve on the quality. This becomes possible with the feedback from the survey on students perspectives and employers’ perception on local law students. The feedback from the students and law practitioners is then used to make recommendations on the appropriate strategies toward the improvement of legal education. This research is the catalyst for further research in legal education. To promote the development of learning and teaching in law at both the academic and professional stages the Committee strongly suggests for the establishment of a Centre for Legal Education at the national level. The centre will be a body where all law teachers not only meet and exchange their teaching experience but promote professional legal education in Malaysia, and to foster research opportunities with and on the legal profession.