MY JOURNEY TO PUPILLAGE
Call to the Bar, Kuala Lumpur High Court, Jalan Raja (Nov 2006). I wish I found that photo of my Pak Lang and grandmother who also attended. With friends (L-R) Halian who had been called to the Bar and practising, and Fareez who would soon after me commence pupillage in the same firm.
I’m writing this to share some points, especially for law students who are about to or going to graduate, with a view of seeking a place to undergo pupillage.
I never planned to practice law, or practice as a lawyer for long, or even set up my own firm. I did all of these and I do lawyering for a living.
In university, I thought I would become a PTD in the foreign service or an academician. The idea was to power through to the doctorate and teach and write. My parents were both lecturers and I grew up in the university environment. In such environment, I think the sentiment of being self-employed was negative. Of the influential family members in my life, only one or two were involved in business. Most were either government or private employees. We had zero lawyers in the family, but I had 2 law graduates who preceded me, my uncle Hj Mansor Din (retired as ACP Ketua Jabatan Pentadbiran at IPK Selangor, Shah Alam) and Assoc Prof Dr Duryana Mohamed my cousin.
Becoming a private practitioner and running my own law office was never part of the plan. In fact such a concept would have had much negativity from my own value system growing up. But this also helps me understand some of the public’s attitudes toward the profession.
My first exposure to private practice was undergoing the required period of pupillage. To get their license to practice law, a lawyer must be called to the Bar having completed their period of pupillage. Pupillage is comparable to a 9-month industrial training at a law firm. It is also called chambering and latihan dalam kamar. A person undergoing such training is called a pupil, chambering student or pelatih dalam kamar (“PDK”). So you need to undergo this training to be called to the Bar and your name registered in the roll of advocates & solicitors. But you do not need to be called to the Bar if you do not wish to become a private practitioner. You can be employed as an in-house corporate counsel or legal executive at a corporation without you needing to be called to the Bar. You do not need to be called to the Bar to enlist in the Judicial & Legal Service (but I presume that could be the reason why me and a few other friends in 2007 were absorbed as Pegawai Tetap and not Pegawai Kontrak – but that’s just my assumption). I believe some people want to get called to the Bar as a tick in their box of things to do, an accomplishment, and it is also a social status symbol.
In my social circle, among my classmates, there were some typical law firm types that were talked about as destinations for pupillage. Some lecturers also promoted such ideas.
1. Big name corporate firms like Zaid Ibrahim & Co, Shearn Delamore, Skrine, and as far as Aikolians are concerned, Azmi & Associates. The myth in 2005 is that in such firms you would be placed in a department and perhaps rotated. You will have depth but not breadth.
2. Small and Medium sized generalist firms. The myth in 2005 is that in such firms you would have all around exposure to everything and therefore cleverer than a big name firm.
Looking back, such myths seem a bit uninformed, but there is some truth in them. I suspect item 2 above was invented be graduates who could not make it into a big name firm and invented reasons, after realizing how much more their friends there were earning. But I don’t blame them (ourselves). We go through life with all kinds of inaccurate messages. For a law student looking at graduation, my sincere advice is to speak to actual practicing lawyers at least 5 years in uninterrupted practice, ask from those from different types of law firms, and inquire about their pupillage programmes. I believe you would get a better view of things. And do not be tied down by any notion that “I must start strong with the best possible start in my career in the best possible law firm because I want to be a great maritime insurance lawyer with the ideal home and family”. That is false. I mean, insha Allah you can achieve all that but what I mean is, you do not need to start wearing goggles like that fixed over your eyes. Until about you are maybe 30+ you should allow yourself some mistakes here and there. By your early 30’s you should get your act together – it is no longer cool to be blundering about especially if you have mouths to feed and debts to repay.
In my humble view, your own personality and inclinations are better indicators of your path to success (and which to avoid too).
That was why I was dissatisfied with the 2 typical options above. The less typical option of course was to work for a parent or relative who happened to be a senior lawyer.
So my plan was this. I once had this idea that I would be called to the Bar and then practice for some 5 years and then join academia. That did not happen. I would occasionally take up teaching or part time jobs part time over the years because I do enjoy teaching (not marking though).
Months passed leading up to and after graduation, and I still couldn’t identify which law firm to apply to. Literally, I went door to door at Old Town, Petaling Jaya to various law firms, with CV in hand. It wasn’t hard because Old Town PJ can be covered on foot. I went around State PJ too. No cover letter – but each copy of CV had its own envelope, doubling as my shade and fan in the sun. I didn’t have a plan and it was not very clever. As you can guess, I only had negative response. Again, it didn’t help that I did not know any lawyers personally (actually some childhood friends had lawyer brothers and sisters but I totally missed it). Now I do get random students walking in for pupillage, and I understand the randomness. But I say again – know yourself and have a plan!
It was toward the end of my final semester that I met Mr Srimurugan Alagan at the IIUM Law Library (now known as Dar al-Hikmah Library). He was my tutor for my Criminal Procedure class under Dr Farah Nini Dusuki (now in the Law Faculty at UM). Mr Sri was intensely poring over a pile of green-bound volumes of the Malayan Law Journal. I said hi to him and he invited me to sit with him. I asked him about pupillage. He said for litigation, I should consider Shafee or Karpal. He gave only 2 names. He was the only private practitioner I knew and I took his advice.
Excluding the door-to-door law firms in PJ, I applied to only 3 firms : Shafee & Co., Shook Lin & Bok and the third I don’t remember. There might not even have been a third application. Shook Lin & Bok was on my aunt’s recommendation because she said she knew one of their partners. I was more intent on the former – I read up the exploits of the then-Dato’ Shafee and found his adventures interesting. As a law student, I did see the name Shafee mentioned in my readings but knew nothing about the man.
MY PUPILLAGE IN SHAFEE & CO.
My mother and my wife would inform you how impactful was the man Muhammad Shafee bin Md Abdullah was on me in 2006-2007. I was happy and excited to undergo my training there. I called it “work” even though much of the “work” was research, translation, writing letters (which often were butchered and corrected many times with scolding from the senior LAs), compiling documents. But looking back, I believe some of the deepest research I did was during those months at his chambers. At Shafee I was taught no read in between the lines of the leading judgments because a lot takes place in court and out of court that is not written. I was taught to recover submissions and petitions of appeal (at that time, there were ways to get copies of them). I studied Hansards and debates, amending acts, PU(A) and PU(B). Long before “Basic Structure” became one of the buzzwords at our superior courts as it is today, the concepts, philosophy and wealth of constitutional law ideas were discussed over the long glass table of the library at Shafee & Co.
I arrived with my application, this time with a cover letter. It must have been early December 2005. I used a map to get to Chambers Twenty Five. I climbed to Bukit Tunku, a mysterious, forbidding place I knew nothing about, and no one I knew knew anything about. Tight, winding, unfriendly roads hiding giant ruins, cracked pillars and moss-covered mansions. Rumours survived that a decrepit citadel belonged to a member of a royal family from Borneo. I came upon a clearing, a fork in the road and briefly saw “Chambers Twenty Five” on red brick. This was 2005 gentlemen so there was no pond and it was the old lobby not this nice new one. I drove past like 4 times. I was excited. Could this really be the Chambers Twenty Five? No one there knew I was coming and no one there knew I existed ever.
Even though I came just to hand-deliver my CV and cover letter, I dressed my best and I think I wore a tie too. I was under some hopeful assumption that I could be called in immediately for an interview; how silly. I handed the envelope to a lady at the counter and asked if there were vacancies. She said there could be and that they would get back to me. I had cold responses from those PJ firms – I would not let this visit to Bukit Tunku be in vain.
Some two weeks later I called in and asked, but they said it was still being processed. On the third week, I was contacted and asked to meet their lawyer. I was interviewed by Ms Kaushalya Rajathurai, a senior Legal Assistant whom I lost contact for many years – I think she is practicing in Singapore now. I was my first ever interview by a lawyer. I don’t remember the content of the interview but I remember we spoke about Mandarin language, which both of us attempted learning but could not go very far beyond classes. There was not much to interview because, well I was just being interviewed for pupillage. I did not ask any questions. Later in life I would learn that in an interview, the interview does not have to be one way. A person being interviewed should ask questions too, to understand the job scope, expectations and the prospective employer. In an interview, the balance of power may be on the part of the employer or the employee – but usually it is tilted to the former. In situations where the balance is in favour of the employee, usually the interview is just a formality because things have been fixed earlier on through less formal (but still important) interactions. This I found from experience and from the benefit of other people’s experience.
Another two weeks passed. I received a call from Shook Lin & Bok. Even though my place at Shafee was not confirmed, I was no longer interested in the latter. I didn’t want to be a corporate lawyer in a corporate law firm doing capitalist law. I wanted the mist covered Bukit Tunku and the great Muhammad Shafee.
I was called in to meet Dato’ Shafee himself.
Who was this man Muhammad Shafee? He was one of the greatest men I learned from and worked for. At least from my observation (and I would never know what really happened behind the scenes) he was the coolest person under fire (stress) that I had witnessed. I’ll thus say this in past tense and say as I saw it at that time. Dato’ Shafee was a prolific reader and read all kinds of books non-stop. He was a tenacious workaholic and worked at all times of day through public holidays, nights and to the morning. Likewise he worked his LAs accordingly. He was much more lenient to pupils compared to LAs. But I am aware that even if he was displeased with your work in the morning, he would not hold a grudge and could be totally different in the afternoon. I have worked with superiors who did not hold grudges and I have worked with superiors who mark you for life and they do not forget being affronted—the latter type, it is important to give a good first impression and gain their trust. If they are displeased, then the burden to change their impression of you becomes more difficult. Not Dato’ Shafee. He’ll just work you, but I do not think he takes things personally. Toward the end of my pupillage, I asked him some point of advice and he said “Whatever you do, do not do wrong to anyone, and always be happy with what you do”. Something like that. He always looked like he enjoyed what he was doing and I do not remember him ever complaining (but he did reserve colorful remarks for deserving individuals – to earn that status they must have had done something really underhanded). From what I heard, as a whole, despite the late hours and burned public holidays, and the allowance, I believe I got things easy as a pupil. It helped immensely that my parents were still working and supporting me.
In later life I did see him in Court, and how some of his presentations were coupled with strong statements. I can assure you, he did not wing his work. Dato’ Shafee made sure we chased every point to its basic foundational premise and test it vigorously from the perspective of both or more sides to a dispute. What you see in Court is only the cliched tip of the iceberg, with much of the arduous preparation work unseen and ultimately, underwater.
He did tell us that he wanted to develop us into specialists and experts in our field. He did tell me that he wished to see more good young lawyers at the superior courts and that he wanted to develop me into one. Regret to say I could not follow through with what he said. But he gave me that opportunity. You should not shun such opportunities if presented. A few experienced lawyers and former lawyers, besides Encik Badrul, Hasnal Redzua Merican, Vazeer Alam and others had spent time at his chambers. One day I asked him, which prosecutor he regarded well, he said Kevin Morais (now late) and Kamarul Hisham (who had left service by then). Dato’ Shafee himself was prosecutor involved in some cases known well by criminal law practitioners such as Jayaraman (the temple case), Husdi (the case about the “hunch”). He very seldom spoke about his experience in service, but I remember him saying that victims of crime do get a certain closure when a case results in a conviction. Much of my time in training there, I was exposed to concepts of natural justice and fair trial. Dato’ Shafee was big on concepts like that, and I believe so are most lawyers. I was taught about the role of a lawyer, that we take instructions and do not judge anyone. That we defend our clients with meticulous preparation beforehand and followed by robust execution, within the ambit provided by law. He was also big on judicial power, inherent jurisdiction, and, as what would later be articulated as Basic Structure, but he had his own take on it. I absorbed the idea that the superior courts by their very nature do have some reserve powers that may or may not be written, and which Parliament cannot touch. I hope I understood his idea in its proper context, but I was still new and fresh at the time.
Dato’ Shafee appreciated all kinds of art and music. Because of him, I took home a CD of a modern European singer, probably Andrea Bocelli. He played it at, I don’t know, 2 or 3 in the morning at his home, where he ordered a kind of Egyptian eggplant roll. We worked late even until sunrise and sometimes he would take us for some makan, sometimes it was mutton curry or whatever. On a hard day it would be KFC, which wore out fast. Dato’ Shafee himself did not seem to be a heavy eater. He didn’t smoke and did not golf. He was a neat and clean man. He had a way of washing his hands, even without soap. So at Sungai Buloh prison where we visited a client on death row, he washed his hands for a long time. He said, Allah’s miracle with water, water by itself eliminates most harm in our daily life, or something like that.
About golf, he said he never pursued golf even though many other lawyers did it. He said he just did not have the time. I cannot say here what he did in his free time, but he used to swim at very early mornings and other healthy matured gentleman stuff.
Because of Dato’ Shafee, I have a copy of Bindra’s Interpretation of Statutes in my own library because that was the go-to book at his place at the time, and we were always trying to persuade the Court to consider rules of interpretation. Because of him, I also have a copy of Geoffrey Robertson’s Tyrannicide Brief, which I found to be a hard read but explained many historical questions about the law and about the relationship between King and Country in the common law tradition. I also liked the art style, which as you can see had influenced my choice of commons pictures in this website.
In 2006, his effect on me was so impactful that my mother said I started to laugh like him and walk like him (don’t take that literally, you know what I mean). I observed how he read cases, how he spoke on the phone and how he manouvred his points in Court, how he arranged his books on the Bar table. I would never fully comprehend the depth of his thoughts, but at least I got a chip of it. I wanted to have a barrister’s vest just like his, with a dark lacy ornament at the sleeve ends. In life you will cross paths with great men in your vocation. You may work with them, learn from them or even just study them from a distance. Do not shy from absorbing the best qualities of role models around you.
This was how my interview with him went.
I took some steps into a room. I was guided by Puan Rohaya Hassan, called Kak Rohaya. He had like 3 or more places where he could be found working. So this was one of the places that he did serious work.
He wore a white shirt rolled at the sleeves. Very often I saw him wearing a white shirt even on non-court days. Or maybe they were court days that he did not attend personally.
When I arrived, he just took his eyes off my CV. Maybe it was the first time he read it. But it was an enriching meeting from the moment we made eye contact. His humour, laughter, were welcoming and not as cold, unreachable as I imagined of a senior lawyer. I believe he ceramah me about information overload – that in the current time (that would be 2006), there were too many sources of information, and we need to be selective. He impressed me as a highly progressive, forward thinking person with futuristic ideas about government, law and administration of justice. And that office room had a number of nude paintings and statues from all over the world.
I had no jacket for the “MR” drug trafficking case. Dato’ Shafee handed me his jacket and told me to get into his car and follow him to Shah Alam High Court. It was mid-morning on a Tuesday or Wednesday. At Court, my pupilmaster appeared before Justice KN Segara and asked permission for me to be seated with him. A pupil is not permitted to appear in open Court until he receives his “short-call” probably 3 months before the long call. Even then, a short-called can only appear before a Magistrate or before Judge in Chambers (which, as I understand it, no longer exists as it used to before the new Rules of Court 2012). So a pupil needs permission from the Court.
My senior was there, Encik Badrul Munir Mohd Bukhari, my senior at IIUM by about 2-3 years. He did his chambering at Shafee & Co under Azizan “Art” Harun, and when I first met him, had been an LA for almost 2 years already. I consider him one of my longtime colleagues and friends until today. He would always belanja me lunch and “took care” of me during my pupillage. I learned many things from him. I have never heard him curse or gossip or say bad things about other people. Encik Badrul also never made promises that he could not keep. In professional life, you do encounter gems like these.
The opponent that day was Tuan Wan Shaharuddin, Deputy Public Prosecutor from Selangor Prosecution Unit. I did not understand the line of questioning by Dato’ Shafee who cross-examined the chemist on some technical aspect of the analysis to prove the items seized were drugs. But I could follow the testimony and examination of the police witnesses. Some story arose from the police witness which apparently contradicted the story told by the first police witness (called a Raiding Officer). Boss (as we called Dato’ Shafee) then instructed us to interview MR and to obtain certain information from him to prepare for sentence in mitigation. I did not really comprehend what that was about, but looking back, Dato’ Shafee probably was preparing for an alternative charge to be offered for possession.
I remember accompanying Encik Badrul Munir to the parking lot and handing a letter (probably a letter of representation to appeal for the charge to be reduced) to Tuan Wan Shaharuddin as he was entering his Proton Waja. All that did not make sense to me at that time, but today I look back and I think it was pretty cool that Dato’ Shafee had a representation letter ready even before the Anggota Serbuan took the stand to contradict the Raiding Officer; of course the letter would be sent only after the testimony established the contradiction.
So I will stop here and I will not go too much into my journey during pupillage to being called to the Bar.
I hope this snippet of my life benefits you especially if you are a law student, or contemplating pupillage or even law school, or even if you have worked many years and about to commence pupillage late in career.
May I summarise as follows some points:
1. Do not pressure yourself that you must “start strong” at the “right place”. That is nonsense because career is a long period. Do not follow the trend or the herd.
2. There is no rush to commence pupillage unless you really want to get married and earn a salary or to support your parents, etc. You can do other things after graduation before starting. You may not have an opportunity like this again. Forever.
3. Read about the firm that you apply to, have an idea of what they do. Many firms do not have websites, so sometimes you can find out about a firm through reported judgments and word of mouth from practitioners.
4. When you send your application by hand, you can ask around the office for vacancy or any intel on the firm. If you send by e-mail, perhaps you can call in and ask the staff. If you are lucky they can ask around for you.
5. Pupillage is only 9 months but if you are fresh out of university, it can be an enriching experience, with lifelong lessons, friends and networking. Make the most of the friendships with colleagues and bosses.
6. Try to start your work early (I used to habitually arrive in office at 7.00am and start early, but I was just lucky) and finish before noon. Because you might be required to perform tasks for senior lawyers or attend (= wait for) meetings that consume your time.
7. Some law firms do not practice good habits. You may have to unlearn them later. In any case, keep an open mind, be an adult, and remember what your professional duty ultimately is at all times, regardless where you work. If the place does not fit in with your personality and your convenience, you better leave.
8. There is a myth (which I used to believe) that you should not simply choose a place of pupillage because it is convenient or simply because your father knows the owner. The myth I used to believe is you need to climb unknown mountains to find the hidden gems. I have changed my views, which now I think were too high performer / kiasu / idealistic. You see, pupillage in Kuala Lumpur can be costly due to transport, parking and many other hidden costs. There is nothing wrong with doing pupillage at a more accessible firm nearer to your parent’s house or more accessible (family connections). Do not do something more difficult because it is “macho” or more prestigious or shows that you are hardworking person. You are buying into an idea that is false. That was my own thinking and I now believe it was unfounded. But I remind myself and your goodself of the value of networking and social circles. That helps you in the long run.
9. I know friends who were doing Magistrate trials right after short call. Though it sounded impressive at the time, now it sounds less impressive. So I say it again, there is no rush. If you have to do trial, then you will do so, but do not choose a firm because you want to get that trial experience and get a good head start. You know when you join the job market (after long call) there are thousands of people in there with you – called to the bar same time or just before or years before you. No one wins the race and there is no “good head start”. You just get in and do the work. Even with your trial experience, how much experience could you have obtained in three months yang bagus sangat? Furthermore, you can only dream if you think your trial experience of three months is anywhere near the three months of your colleagues who opted to join the judicial and legal service. You cannot beat a DPP’s trial experience. Lawyers win out on meticulous preparation, good research, good advocacy and English, good client management, rapport with court and institutional clients , and Knowledge with a capital K not on numeric trial experience.
10. Let’s say there is a famous lawyer named Dato’ Muthu and you admire him and want to learn from him. Don’t be disappointed if you do not become his pupil and instead are assigned to his (sometimes unpopular) LA. Once you are in, make the most of it. Anything or “nothing” can happen in 9 months.
11. Toxic office environments are normal and sadly the norm for many types of firms. Just put up with it for 9 months. I would caution against jumping firms midway but if you have to, do it after 4-5 months and come up with a good respectable reason like you want to learn a new practice area or whatever. Manage your expectations especially with money and hours. As mentioned above, unless you have family members to support, attend to the issue of remuneration, at this stage, with moderation. Unless you were first class Oxbridge or top of your Ivy League cohort.
12. The generation gap is real. Bosses from generations earlier have a different value system than my generation or even millennials or later. The earlier you accept that, the more rapidly you can benefit from working in a multi-generational office environment. Accept also that the staff, LAs, and other people in the ecosystem have different risks, motivations, interests, etc. So leave your ego at the doorstep of the office, complete the assigned tasks and blend in. Always be respectful and make friends with everyone. You don’t have to be likeable but you need to survive.
13. I know friends who started with one big name law firm and have worked their way up in the same practice are for over 15 years. I can’t imagine that for myself, but that could be a way for you. And being a generalist can be overrated sometime. If you are at a good place, you would be slotted up with higher value clients. There are thousands of generalist firms who serve generalist markets. I have not yet met a lawyer who cannot get a job. There is always a market to serve. The question you need to ask yourself is where you want to be and when. Where you start can also influence your perspective.
14. There are lots of great places to start your career but which are not really famous in the public eye. I can’t write them out here but there are so many of them.