The scrutineers of the Bar Council elections are not answerable to a lawyer who had sued them and the council over the controversial forged ballot papers in the last elections.

Lawyer Zainur Zakaria, for one of the scrutineers Dr Yaacob Hussain Merican, said the plaintiff Foo Ton Hin had no rights or power to compel the scrutineers to act in a certain manner.

"What makes the scrutineers answerable to the plaintiff? Do the scrutineers owed the plaintiff any duty?" Zainur questioned when submitting his arguments in the court this afternoon.

Foo is involved in a legal battle over the Bar Council Elections for 2007/2008 and has named the Council and its three election scrutineers - Inderjit Singh, S Radhakrishnan and Yaacob as defendants.

He claims that the three scrutineers had acted beyond the scope of the Legal Profession Act when they purportedly declared the election null and void before votes were counted.

Foo was one of the 3,370 voters who voted last year to elect 12 council members for the Bar Council's new term.

However, the scrutineers discovered forged ballot papers, leading to police reports being lodged and the elections being declared null and void by them.

Foo is seeking a declaration that they had acted beyond the scope of the LPA when they declared the elections void on Dec 1.

He wants the court to instruct the scrutineers to verify the authenticity of the ballots cast by matching each against its counterfoil and excluding any that is not authentic.

Thereafter, he wants the defendants to declare the names of the persons elected according to Section 50 (5) of the LPA within seven days of the court order. In the alternative, Foo wants the court to order three partners of an international accounting firm or other persons to be appointed as scrutineers at the expense of the Bar Council.

It should then take all necessary steps to complete the elections and announce the names of those elected.

No legal standing

Today, the court continued to hear an application by Yaacob to strike out Foo's suit. Yaacob is questioning Foo's locus standi (legal standing) in bringing the suit.

"The plaintiff has the right to vote, this right to vote can't be denied," conceded Zainur said while submitting to judge KP Gengadharan.

However Zainur said the question was whether Foo has the right to file the case.

In the previous hearing, Foo's counsel Tommy Thomas submitted that his client had the locus standi to sue the Bar Council over the elections as he also had the interest in knowing whether his choice of candidates were elected.

Thomas also argued that Foo's locus standi could be established under section 4C of the LPA, which counsel said outlined a member's statutory right to file a case if he was a voter in a Bar Council elections.

The hearing continues on Feb 8.

Apart from the Bar Council and the three scrutineers, the other defendants in the case are Boniface Lobo, Dr Rafie Mohd Shafie, Hendon Haji Mohamed and Cecil Rajendra all of whom were candidates for the elections.