No , No , No , You are Wrong , wrong , wrong ! I am right , Nothing Wrong !!!
Wed, 29 Sep 2010 06:00          
                   By Teoh El Sen
PETALING JAYA: Cases involving the Petaling  Jaya City Muncipal Council (MBPJ) are being given to a law firm where  two PKR leaders R Sivarasa and Latheefa Koya, a MBPJ councillor, work.    
 However, MBPJ mayor Mohammad Roslan Sakiman described it as an “old story”.
He  also dismissed the allegation that it was a case of special preference  and denied that it could lead to a conflict of interest.
"No, I  cannot answer this. This was discussed in a meeting some time ago and  everything had been dealt with; this is a non-issue,” he told FMT.
“We  don't think it is a conflict of interest for a councillor to be a  lawyer in a law firm we engage. Latheefa is not a shareholder of the  firm," he explained.
Roslan also refuted the claim that the firm  Daim & Gamany was not in the list of MBPJ's legal panel, saying the  firm was fully sanctioned by the council.
Sources told FMT that the issue was raised by several councillors during a special MBPJ meeting last year.
The  councillors wanted to know why Daim & Gamany had been allowed to  represent the council since it might lead to a conflict of interest.
During that meeting, the council had decided that there was no issue and the matter was closed.
However, sources said that Daim & Gamany had been given at least four cases to handle in recent months.
“The  firm charges the maximum fee allowed by MBPJ. Other firms had quoted  lower fees and yet they were not appointed to represent the council,”  said a source.
"In a few recent court cases, procedures and  policies for selecting legal firms were bypassed. The council is  supposed to send letters to all firms on the legal panel when there is a  case, and ask for their price quotations, but this was not done,” added  the source.
'Conflict of interest'As  for conflict of interest, the sources cited Section 35 of the Local  Government Act 1976 which states: "No councillor shall by himself or his  partner or agent act in any professional capacity for or against the  local authority of which he is a councillor."
The sources said  although Latheefa, who is also PKR information chief, might not be  personally handling MBPJ cases, her position in the council and law  firm, however, gave rise to a conflict of interest.
This was because she could have access to sensitive information and documents, they said.
The  sources also cited another example where in 2003 and 2005, Sivarasa,  who is PKR vice-president, had represented the residents of Taman  Desaria PJS5.
The residents had taken legal action against the  then Barisan Nasional-controlled Selangor government and MBPJ for  allowing low-cost flats to be built in their area for the nearby  squatters of Taman Medan.
In 2005, the court ruled in favour of  the residents and declared the flats illegal. It also awarded damages to  the residents and declared MBPJ's development order issued to Mentari  Properties Sdn Bhd null and void.
In the landmark ruling, the  court held that local authorities must hear the views of affected  residents before issuing any development orders.
Soon after  Pakatan Rakyat took over Selangor in 2008, MBPJ decided to appeal  against the decision and it is understood that Sivarasa continued to act  for the Taman Desaria residents. The case is still pending.
Professional conductAnother  MBPJ councillor Derek Fernandez, who had also acted for the Desaria  residents in the past, discharged himself on grounds of conflict of  interest.
However, sources said MBPJ's move to appoint Sivarasa's firm for several cases was strongly supported by Fernandez.
"How  can Sivarasa be acting in a suit against the council and at the same  time be given cases to defend MBPJ? Isn't that a clear-cut case of  conflict of interest?" asked a source.
In another case last year,  Sivarasa represented the council when residents of Taman Sri Aman,  Petaling Jaya protested against a condominium project being undertaken  in their area.
MBPJ then issued a stop-work order to the  developer, Sri Aman Development Sdn Bhd, which was building the  Paramount View condominium and an access road.
Subsequently, the  developer went to court and filed for a judicial review of MBPJ's  action. The court ruled in favour of the developer.
Several  lawyers told FMT that such examples of conflict of interest went against  the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978, where a  lawyer should not accept a case if his professional conduct could be  challenged.
FMT learnt that Sivarasa was also representing MBPJ  in two judicial review cases involving the council and two outdoor  advertising companies.
'These are wild allegations to shame us'Both Sivarasa and Lateefa denied that they were involved in cases that gave rise to conflict of interest.
"The  Local Government Act prohibits only councillor-lawyer from acting for  or against the council... I am not a councillor, so where is the  conflict?" asked Sivarasa, who has been practising law for 24 years.
The PKR leader explained that he was mostly hired by MBPJ for judicial review cases, which was his area of specialisation.
"These  allegations are simply caused by ignorance. These people do not  understand what conflict of interest is. In the Taman Desaria case,  conflict of interest does not arise at all,” he said.
On the  allegation of high legal fees, he said: "This is subjective. Lawyers  come in all shapes and sizes. I charge according to what I feel is fair  and it is subject to MBPJ's decision."
Meanwhile, Latheefa described it as “wild allegations made by those with their own agenda to shame a few of us”.
The lawyer said she had never acted for or against MBPJ since she was appointed as councillor in 2008.
"Bringing  this up is a nasty thing to do. I never participated in any discussion  at council meetings. In fact, I deliberately stayed away from such  meetings whenever my legal firm was involved.
"In what way have I  breached Section 35? It doesn't mean that just because I am in the same  law firm, everything I do gives rise to conflict of interest," she  added.
Latheefa stressed that conflict of interest occured only when sensitive information was involved.