I refer to the call by Karpal Singh for the resignation of current Bar Council chairperson Mah Weng Kwai.

It is true that Mah has no sense of direction in addressing political and human rights concerns. Unfortunately, it does appear that in the last couple of annual general meetings that there is really no person of some calibre at the Bar Council who can shoulder the political responsibility of being its chief.

Lawyers would cringe at the use of the word 'political' or at least Mah would cringe most at this word.

When Cyrus Das left as chairperson after the usual term of two years, many lawyers and the majority of junior lawyers (lawyers with less than seven years' practice) wanted Sulaiman Abdullah to stand as chief.

However, as a matter of rule and practice, only the 30-odd Bar Council members can choose the chief not the body of the Bar. There were extensive debates when Cyrus Das' term was up that the body of the Bar should choose the chief. This was not to be the case.

Mah, as was the successor, of Cyrus Das were old boys in the Bar Council and had to be given the chance to be chief because of their 'long service' . This is the trouble.

Sulaiman remains as one of the more credible Bar chiefs after Cyrus Das. However, he served only one term due to health reasons and his position on freedom of belief and conscience. Much respect for him still remains.

Once in a blue moon Council members can be tough, but more often they just pat each other's back.