“We always respect the WTO commitments, but that doesn’t
mean foreign lawyers can practice their profession here without respecting the
laws of Cambodia. They are just required to be registered, like in other countries,
and the U.S. Embassy should reconsider and do some…legal research. If it is
necessary to take legal action, I will file a suit.”
BAKC
(Bar Association of the Kingdom of Cambodia) president Bun Honn, 29 April 2015,
the Cambodia Daily
“Cambodia has opened
up its services sector per our WTO commitments but they [foreign lawyers] are
still subject to domestic regulations. Opening up a service sector does not
mean free and unregulated entry.”
Cambodian
WTO lead negotiator Dr Sok Siphana, 3 May 2015, Campro Forum
“I note that a number of foreign advisors who are not
even admitted to the Bar in their home countries or countries of origin, and do
not have capacity to read Khmer legislative texts, are trying to mislead some
government authorities, investors and the public here and there including their
countrymen in Cambodia or at their home countries, that they are allowed to legally
practice laws in Cambodia and solicit the engagement of their services in
obvious disregard of Cambodian laws and the WTO provisions. [Sic]”
Former
BAKC secretary-general and HBS LAW Managing Director Ly Tayseng, 5 May 2015,
Campro Forum
The outcry for the rule of law, which is so common among
blue-collar workers and victims of land grabbing, development, etc…, has spread
to legal practitioners. It remains to be seen if the intelligentsia would do
any better.
The BAKC, which is a union for lawyers, is convinced legal
powers are on their side. The 1995 Law on the Bar Statutes empowers them to
control the legal profession in the country. It is compulsory for all lawyers
to register with the Bar before they can open up their shop. Architect of the
Cambodia’s WTO membership Sok Siphana emphatically rejects a notion that WTO
regulations can overshadow the local ones.
In their 8 Dec 2014 statement, the Bar extol the virtue of
the rule of law, and seek to enforce their compulsory membership on some 50 or
so foreign lawyers who have been practising their trade in Cambodia without the
registration. And, the foreigners object.
They may have reasons for the objection. If professional
contempt is one of them, then the Bar ought to look at themselves.
It is possible the Bar have failed to do enough for the
legal profession to command respect. They have ignored the foreign lawyers
registration for twenty years – long enough to convince anyone that the Bar has
perpetually broken its own regulations and obligations. Now they preach the
rule of law, after breeding a sentiment that if the Bar can break them, so can
others.
The Bar’s actions to rein in the foreign lawyers seem feeble.
They appear to beg the violators to register “as soon as possible” – without
imposing any deadline, leaving an impression that time is on the violators’
side. Bun Honn says he will drag them to court only if necessary, without
realising that breaking a law is all it needs to be necessary. He may not be
confident the court will apply the rule of law, despite claims that some
foreign lawyers are not even registered in their own country. The Bar is
riddled with doubts.
Indeed, it may take the Bar another twenty years to complete
the registration, which gives much comfort to those who would argue “Rome is
not built in a day” for any procrastination.
Beneath this Bar’s sudden urge to enforce the rule of law,
there may lie a hidden commercial agenda. It seems bankruptcy is staring some
local lawyers in the face. A long-standing lawyer who vigorously advocates the
registration for all has already declared he is not making any money, and prepared
to shut down his firm and drive taxi in the West for a living. Will the
registration of the foreign lawyers really make his firm profitable?
If the Bar’s rhetoric is driven by commercial interests of
their members, it will be amazing how a competition from the 50 odd foreign
lawyers can drive some local lawyers up the wall and out of business. What can
those 50 do that Bar’s members of almost 1,000, which include big names like premier
Hun Sen, cannot?
Ung Bun Ang
20v15
Parthian Shot
It is understandable why Hun Sen refuses to pay when he
loses his bet on the fight between Mayweather and Pacquiao. After all, five
grand is almost half of his declared income under the anti-corruption law.
However, if he reneges on a lousy five grand for a simple
reason that he does not like the referees’ decision against his interest, what
will he do if he loses the next election? Or, what will he do to the elections to
make sure he wins?
“Now if we are talking about yesterday’s fight, I owe you
[$5,000], but I will not pay.”
Premier
Hun Sen, 5 May 2015, the Cambodia Daily
Should you wish to receive Pseng-Pseng on your screen as soon as
it is released, subscribe to it at https://tinyletter.com/pseng-pseng
Pseng-Pseng is published on the tenth, twentieth, and thirtieth
day of every month. Previous issues are archived at pseng-pseng.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment