While the Bar Council contends that it opposed R Sivarasa's application on the basis that Section S46A of the LPA is necessary to preserve the Bar's perceived independence and apolitical image, I cannot seem to convince myself that politics itself did not play a role in the decision to object to the application.

In whose eyes are we trying to preserve this perceived independence? In the eyes of the public or the political masters?

It is no secret that the Bar Council is tainted with its own brand of politics. This has been evident in recent years.

Please wake up before it's too late. Sivarasa's application had nothing to do with politics of the Bar. It was a challenge on a provision that may very well have been unconstitutional; isn't one of the functions of the Bar to uphold the constitution?

Instead of opposing the application the Bar Council should have supported the move and left it to the discretion of the court. The decision of the Bar Council clearly flies in the face of the struggles of their predecessors especially the Bar Council of 1977/78. I hope this matter will be brought up during the next AGM of the Bar or even sooner in an EGM.