PETALING JAYA: Lawyers applying for their clients’ medical reports and records at government hospitals are reportedly being asked to provide copies of their identity cards or practising certificates.
The Bar Council has described the requirement as “inappropriate and unwarranted” and is seeking to resolve the matter with the Health Ministry.
In an Oct 27 circular, the council’s Government Affairs Committee said it had received reports of such requirements at Health Ministry hospitals.
The circular, signed by the committee’s co-chairpersons Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo and Balakrishna Balaravi Pillai, stated that the committee was urging affected lawyers to come forward and identify the hospitals involved and establish the circumstances surrounding the requests.
The circular called the requirement inappropriate and unwarranted, and sought clarification on existing practices.
The committee said the move aimed to standardise and streamline applications for patients’ medical records.
Lawyers have until Nov 5 to provide the requested details, including whether the requirement applies to individual lawyers or law firms.
Efforts have been made to contact the Health Minister and his aide, but The Star has yet to receive any response at press time.
When contacted, senior lawyer Kitson Foong said the ministry’s demand for a lawyer’s personal details as a prerequisite to release a client’s medical records “is an unnecessary red tape that delays justice”.
“When we apply for these reports, the hospital only needs the patient’s written consent, not the lawyer’s NRIC.
“Asking for physical practising certificates is equally pointless when our legal standing can be verified online in seconds.”
Foong said he hoped it was just “an innocent bureaucratic misunderstanding” and not an administrative roadblock designed to frustrate the process.
“Whether it’s a poorly thought-out policy or a subtle form of gatekeeping, it must stop, as it ultimately prevents everyday Malaysians from securing the vital evidence they need for their day in court.”
Lawyer R. Ramesh Sivakumar added, “Lawyers acting on their clients’ instructions should not be burdened with unnecessary red tape.
“There is a stark difference between proper verification and making lawyers’ jobs unnecessarily difficult, and a pragmatic balance must be struck.”
Lawyer Zander Lim said government hospitals were right to exercise caution when disclosing patients’ highly personal and confidential medical records, but stressed that verification procedures should be reasonable and proportionate.
“Written authorisation from the patient, together with sufficient information establishing that the lawyer has been duly appointed to obtain the medical records, should ordinarily be sufficient.
“From a criminal litigation perspective, timely access to medical records can be particularly important in remand proceedings, bail applications and other matters involving an accused person’s health.”
Ultimately, the objective should be to strike a proper balance between safeguarding patient confidentiality and facilitating legitimate access to medical records by duly authorised legal representatives.
“A clear and consistent procedure across government hospitals would serve both interests,” Lim said.
