Over the past few weeks, malaysiakini readers have read a series of letters as to whether or not the Malaysian Bar should proceed to discuss the appointment of judges in their forthcoming EGM.

I believe by now, readers have obtained a fair amount of arguments from both sides. The series of legal precedents and interpretation of those judgments is clear manifestation that law is an art rather than a science.

As a layman, my question is: even if the appointment of judges is discussed during the EGM, what difference would it make?

The Bar Council may be able to pass all the resolutions they want but at the end of the day, the process of appointing judges is clearly prescribed and provided for by the Constitution. So long as there is no fundamental breach, no parties can challenge such appointments.

As far as criticism and sending strong messages to the authorities with regard to public sentiments or reactions, I believe the relevant parties have made their stand known since day one, when the announcements were made.

In view of this, I believe the matter should be put to rest now, and more importantly, the Bar should look at their own backyard as well, especially with respect to their services to the public. I am sure many members of the public engage the services of lawyers and more than half of the time, we are at their absolute mercy.

For instance, in a simple house-purchase transaction, the process can drag on if the lawyer chooses to sit on the file. The client has no avenue to complain. On this score, the Bar should probably consider better checks and balances to ensure quality professional services among its members.

This will promote justice as well, in line with the maxim: 'justice delayed is justice denied', rather than spending time fighting a futile battle which entails a large amount of rhetoric (and probably momentary publicity) without any positive results.