Hidup CLP, Makan CLP, Minum CLP, Tidur CLP.
Yup, my current 'obsession', the current most happening thing in my life. *Adoi!*
I refer to a string of articles in the NST on Sunday, 6th April 2008 and I can't help but to agree that there are inherent flaws to the current system that causes injustice, biasness and unfairness to all Malaysian law graduates; be it from local or foreign universities.
I draw your attention to the following articles,
"Is This The End of CLP?" http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/2205438/Article/index_html
"If At First You Don't Succeed" http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/2205441/Article/index_html
"Not Impossible To Pass First Time" http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/2205452/Article/index_html
"CLP Was Only A Stop Gap Measure" http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/2205476/Article/index_html
___
The main aims of the course, as I view it is to introduce law graduates to the practical aspects of legal practice. And as much as I hate to admit, the wide array of subjects covered in the syllabus does this well and proper.
However, I must point out that there are certain aspects of the course that I disagree with. Firstly, we are to juggle 10 different subjects all lumped into 5 different papers. This means having to remember more than 10 different statutes altogether. And I do not see the reason why we are barred from bringing most of the statute books into the exam hall. Instead, we're expected to commit most of them to memory. Stupid ruling!
Secondly, the notoriously low passing rates of the said examination. I had a look through the statistics given on NST on Sunday and the passing rate in the 2007 examinations was at an all time high; 36%. Otherwise, it averages to about 15 - 20% per year. I honestly believe that this is not a true reflection of the academic capability of the students out there. Come on man, there can't be so many stupid people out there!
One reason behind this atrociously low passing rate is the perhaps due to the fact that one has to pass at least 4 papers in the first sitting, of which they qualify for a referral for the 5th paper that they failed in the first sitting. Referrals are normally done in October, and to 'qualify' for a referral, you must get a score of at least 35-39% in that particular paper in the first sitting (i.e. July Paper). Fail 2 subjects or more = Resitting that whole damn examination the following July! I honestly do not see the point behind such ruling. It imposes an unduly heavy burden and mental and psychological agony on us students. Plus, what's the use of resitting the other papers that you've already passed??? Wouldn't it be a better move to allow students to 'carry forward' the credits from the previous examinations? CLP people, I don't get your point here!
Lastly, the system creates unfairness amongst law graduates. At times, I feel that those who graduated from foreign universities are being 'unfairly penalised' by virtue of their qualifications. LLB (UK/Aus/NZ) and LLB (Malaya) makes a lot of difference; one is a 3 year degree and the other a 4 year degree. Most importantly, the former reads must do CLP and the latter, no need to do CLP. Well yes, foreign graduates (those from the UK) have the option of doing the English BAR in the UK instead of CLP. As much as a I refuse to chatise the BAR, it creates an unequal playing field for students. Yes, the BAR is tough but it is almost a 'guaranteed' pass if you do your work. Whereas for us, working hard may not equal to passing the exams. In short, the unlucky ones do not reap what they sow.
If the board decides to continue imposing such stringent 'litmus tests' for the candidates, I am strongly in favour of them imposing a common qualification examination for all graduants; echoing the requirements adopted by Singapore and HK, just to name a few. In that way, there are no 'back-doors' to qualification in Malaysia. Like it or not, we are all adjudged based on the same criteria, same examinations and same stringent standards. That way, we are assured of at least a common standard amongst all graduates. Just like how STPM is to dictate the entry into local Universities. But then again, there's this whole STPM and Matriculation debate....
Having said much about the inequality and unfairness of the examinations, there's only one saving grace. I must admit that I've learnt so much more in my 6 months (and counting) of CLP compared to the 3 years in law school. Law school = academic debates, which has little bearing towards legal practice. Whereas CLP provides us with an insight into legal practice.
So folks, that's my 2 cents worth.
Like it or not, CLP is here to stay and a common qualification examination is miles away.
___
12pm now, time to start shoving my face into those books...
___
So what does a girl do?
She sips her coffee and proceeds to kick start her day!
-LV-
*I know I've been posting very very frequently lately. Well, it's just me. I tend to write more when it's nearing exams and when I'm reading/researching for my papers/courseworks. I view it as an avenue for me to relax and to clear my mind.
So, please bear with me as I am very aware that some of my posts (past, present and future) do not make much sense. Well, I just need to type away.... and hence, my blog is often at the receiving end of my 'abuses'.
Otherwise, it will be the treadmills...
No comments:
Post a Comment