May it please your Lordship,

The Petitioner hails from Kuala Lumpur. She is the youngest daughter of Mr Low Han Seng and Madam Chan Mei Chan. The Petitioner, Low Kar Yeen, is a product of the African saying, It takes a village to raise a child, which may explain her immense empathy for others and her predisposition to think in communal terms. Her grandmother and aunt raised her; her parents and brother funded her through her tertiary education, but that drive to discover and develop the best version of herself is entirely hers.

The Petitioner is one of those whom I would not like as a contemporary of mine. She is one of those for whom industry, initiative and intelligence naturally coalesce. She makes industry appear effortless, natural, almost.

My Lord, will not be surprised when I say she scored 9As and 1B for her SPM, then secured solid A-Level results that took her to Brickfields Asia College where she came in the top 15% internationally for the University of London LLB Honours and won book prize for Intellectual Property Law. The only book prize I ever won was at a lucky draw, My Lord, and it was a book about nutrition.

During the Petitioner’s college and university days, she was active in moots and pre-moots, either as a mooter or a coach. She took part in a major competition every year since 2015. Her last event was the 2nd AIAC-ICC Pre-Moot for the Willem C.Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot. She was honourably mentioned for the Best Claimant and Respondent Outline Submissions and coached 2 Brickfield Asia College teams, which went on to win the championship and the 1st runner-up position.

Throughout those years, the Petitioner held various positions of responsibility. Treasurer of the Leo Club of BAC in 2015/2016 where she won 3 awards including Excellent Treasurer. So the Petitioner has independent acknowledgment of her trustworthiness and competence when dealing with other people’s money. This is something even our previous Prime Minister had difficulty with.

In 2016/2017 she was the internal moot director for the BAC Mooting Society and was more involved in coaching teams. In 2017, she was secretary to the HELP University Toastmasters Club. Finally, in 2017-2018 she was the fundraising officer for the Kalsom movement and successfully raised funds from the likes of Shell to run camps for underprivileged children.

When we stand back and take stock of the Petitioner’s activities and accomplishments, she is one of those I would point to and say, ah, sure she will be a lawyer one, ada otak, work hard, honest and clever to talk; sure okay one. She possesses skills lawyers crave, such as successfully raising funds (which is like getting our bills paid), and accounting and managing firm money (which I do not suffer from because I am still struggling with having enough money to manage).

More importantly, particularly for the purpose of today’s speech, the Petitioner possesses good character. This is a crucial requirement under section 11(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 which is often neglected in call speeches, particularly KL Bar format ones. Speeches that use that format leave no room to demonstrate good character. They fail to satisfy section 11(1)(b) of the Act.

A recital of their academic achievements is not proof of good character. Academic excellence does not guarantee the avoidance of profound corruption. As a mover, it is our duty to demonstrate prima facie good character on the Petitioner’s part. It is that good character and her formal requirements that go towards demonstrating she is a fit and proper person to be called to the Bar, someone deserving of trust.

So what is the Petitioner’s good character? I submit a person of good character has the 5 I’s. By that, I mean – industry, initiative, intelligence, independence, and above all, integrity. Without the anchor of integrity, the other I’s becomes a farce that devolves into a tragedy.

In my assessment of the Petitioner, and having worked with her for 2 months in September and October 2017, I think she has 5 I’s on top of the two bright ones that we all see on her face. She was a great help to me in my work during her time with me. I liked her very much, so much so that I asked her to consider my humble firm when she completed her CLP; regrettably, she chose me as a mover instead of a master. When she worked with me, there were two standout pieces of work that formed my opinion of her ability.

The first involved several share sale agreements that involved numerous parties and numerous companies. It was one of those rare moments when I had several matters on-going which required my attention urgently. My work on that matter was greatly eased because of the Petitioner.

She read the agreements, pointed out the fine discrepancies, corrected them and made sure everything was in order on the signing date. All that was left for me that day was to smile, shake hands and appear like I knew who signed what agreements as I passed out the black pens. Pretty much the rest of it was taken care of by the Petitioner. There she demonstrated industry, initiative, independence and a keen sense of responsibility.

The second involved a criminal appeal I was doing for the YBGK against a conviction after trial for an offence of gang robbery. I left her to prepare the first draft of the submission and was impressed with the quality of her research. She had found what appeared in retrospect to be an obvious point that both the Sessions Court and High Court judge missed – that an unrepresented accused person must be told by the trial judge of the principal points of the prosecution’s case for him to address before he is allowed to continue with the defence of his case. That impressed me because that was the Petitioner’s first brush with a criminal matter and it was a point overlooked by those supposedly familiar with criminal trials. So, there I submit we have proof of both her industry and intelligence.

I now come to her integrity. And what is integrity? It is knowing and staying within our limits; it is doing the right thing the appropriate way. Integrity is easy to speak of but incredibly difficult to do. Whilst pupillage for many of us is the training wheels period before we become full-fledged lawyers, for others who remain undecided it is a period to decide whether they are suitable for legal practice. So it is not without some sense of irony that the Petitioner demonstrated her integrity when she admitted to herself and her family that legal practice is not for her for the present.

Her Master, Mr Lim Jo Yan was prescient in his comments about her. He said, She has a kind heart and finds satisfaction from seeing social good arising from the work she does. She is determined and emotionally invested in her work. She takes pride in her work and naturally I think her parents should be proud of how far she has gone.

I want to assure the Petitioner’s parents what she will be doing will not be very different from what lawyers do when lawyering is done right – she will be helping others with important matters. I know she will be helping others in a more meaningful and immediate way than I have doing pro-bono cases.

She will be joining a social enterprise called Epic Homes which is dedicated to building homes for Malaysian orang asal and orang asli. They have been doing so since 2010. I know her joining them will make them better, and she will be a boon to the indigenous community. I congratulate her on her choice and wish her all the best. I also wish her a happy birthday because today is her birthday.

Finally, I remind the Petitioner that with this call to the Bar the door to return to the law will always remain ajar for her should she ever change her mind.

The Petitioner would like to thank her parents, her brother, Low Kar Sin, her sister, Low Cheau Yeen; her aunt Low Suan Khem and Uncle Low Han Teong; her late grandmother whom she wished were alive to attend her call; her nephews; her cousins and other family relatives; her friends from school, college and life who are here today and those who are not; her teammates at GoBantu; the impecunious she has been privileged to help; her master Mr Lim Jo Yan and her colleagues from Messrs Lim Jo Yan & Co; and all those who have shown her kindness.

In closing, I would like to quote a line for the Petitioner from her favourite musical, Hamilton about her life choices. It is from the George Washington character in the song One Last Time: ‘Everyone shall sit under their own vine and fig tree, And no one shall make them afraid.’

I am confident the Petitioner is of good character and with her formal qualifications a fit and proper person to be called to the Bar. I believe her cause papers are in order.

I pray that the Petitioner be admitted and enrolled as an advocate and solicitor in the High Court of Malaya.