Clinical Legal Education (CLE) has become a defining element of contemporary legal training, transforming

how law schools prepare students for professional practice. Traditional doctrinal teaching, while foundational,

has long been criticized for its limited capacity to equip future lawyers with the skills, ethics, and social

awareness necessary for effective lawyering. CLE bridges this gap by embedding students in real or simulated

legal settings where they can apply substantive law, engage with clients, and confront ethical dilemmas firsthand.

traditions. Employing a qualitative and comparative methodology, the study draws on scholarly literature,

institutional reports, and academic commentaries to map the organization, curriculum integration, and student

participation models in both jurisdictions. Findings indicate that while both systems recognize the pedagogical

value of clinical education, their levels of institutionalization differ markedly. In the United States, CLE is a

wellestablished and mandatory component of legal education, supported by accreditation standards and

evaluated through learning outcomes. In contrast, Malaysian legal aid clinics remain largely cocurricular, relying

Despite these structural differences, both countries share a commitment to cultivating law students’ professional

identity, ethical competence, and community engagement through practical exposure. The comparative analysis

underscores that Malaysia’s CLE framework can be strengthened by embedding legal aid clinics into formal

Clinical Legal Education (CLE) has emerged as a cornerstone of modern legal training, offering students the

opportunity to bridge the gap between legal theory and practical application. There is growing recognition that

traditional, lecture-based teaching alone cannot sufficiently prepare future lawyers for the realities of legal

practice (Farber, 2024). Clinical legal education addresses this gap by placing students in real or simulated legal

environments, fostering experiential learning and the development of a professional identity. A professional

identity focuses on what it means to be a lawyer and the special obligations that lawyers have to their clients and

society. The development of a professional identity should involve an intentional exploration of the values,

guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice (Hamilton &

Thomson emphasizes that faculty can use experiential learning “to develop professional identity by equipping

Thus, legal clinics represent one of the most prominent forms of applied legal education. Moreover, legal clinics

also promote access to justice and legal empowerment, supporting the United Nations Sustainable Development

Goals, particularly Goal 16, which advocates for peace, justice, and strong institutions. This paper conducts a

comparative analysis of clinical legal education through legal aid clinics in Malaysia and the United States.

While Malaysia and the United States recognize the pedagogical value of CLE, their approaches differ in

structure, integration, and student engagement. Through this comparison, the study aims to highlight both shared

practices and unique challenges, offering insights into how legal aid clinics can be optimized as platforms for

The establishment and evolution of universitybased legal aid clinics cannot be understood in isolation from

broader developments in legal education and access to justice movements. The literature on Clinical Legal

Education (CLE) reveals its dual purpose: to serve as a pedagogical innovation that develops practical

competencies among students, and as a mechanism for social justice that ensures access to legal assistance for

marginalized communities. Early scholarship on CLE emphasized its transformative capacity in legal training—

shifting the focus from rote learning to experiential, reflective, and client-centred practices. Recent studies have

expanded this discussion to include its role in advancing professional identity, ethical reasoning, and civic

In Malaysia, existing literature has primarily focused on the evolution of legal aid institutions and their role in

issues. Governments recognize that legal representation can be costly, and not all groups of citizens can afford

it. Another important factor in establishing legal aid clinics is to assist law students in applying their legal skills

and broadening their knowledge of the law. By providing legal aid clinics in universities, students can participate

Therefore, the development of legal aid clinics arose from the understanding that, without access to legal

assistance, many individuals would be vulnerable and at risk of having their rights violated or ignored (Ab.Wahab

not everyone receives free legal aid, as a registration fee may be imposed by the Director General of Legal Aid

Reflecting on Malaysia’s legal aid structures, government-led legal aid consists of three main bodies: the Legal

Aid Department (LAD), formed in 1970; the Malaysian Bar Council’s Legal Aid Centre (LAC), founded in

1982; and the National Legal Aid Foundation (NLAF), established in 2011. Each of these bodies has its own

eligibility requirements, determined by the Means and Merits Tests. The Means Test determines whether an

applicant is financially eligible for legal aid, ensuring that services are provided only to those with low income.

For example, the LAD only accepts applicants with an annual income of not more than RM25,000. Applicants

earning between RM25,000 and RM36,000 may still qualify but are required to pay a small contribution fee (Tri

et al., 2025). The Merits Test, on the other hand, assesses whether the case itself warrants legal aid, ensuring that

As mentioned, the three main government-led legal aid bodies serve different functions. The LAD provides civil

and limited criminal representation, as well as mediation and legal advice. Applicants must pass both the Means

In addition to these, there are also non-government legal aid clinics in Malaysia, mainly operated by universities

and law schools. These clinics offer free or low-cost legal services to low-income individuals and are operated

by the legal aid organization within each university, comprising students, professors, lecturers, paralegals, and

lawyers (Li & Isa, 2023). The legal matters addressed by these clinics include civil law, criminal law, human

rights, consumer law, housing, employment, health law, immigration, and disability law, although each university

differs in the types of cases it handles. Services typically include legal advice, representation, advocacy, and

educational workshops on legal matters. Community-based initiatives also play a role in non-government legal

aid, with organizations of volunteer lawyers providing free or low-cost legal advice. Thus, non-government-led

legal aid in Malaysia is delivered through law school clinics and community-based initiatives, with a focus on

created under the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the Supreme Court decision in Gideon v. Wainwright

Not all states have statewide Public Defender Offices; in states without them, county-level defenders or court-

appointed lawyers provide the service. Lastly, the US also has non-governmental and community legal aid

organizations, such as Legal Aid Societies, Pro Bono Programs, and Law School Clinics. These organizations

focus on civil rights, immigrants, domestic violence victims, housing, and employment issues (Rønning &

Hammerslev, 2018). Nongovernmental legal aid in the US is often based at universities and NGOs, run by private

lawyers and law students. The aim is to provide legal aid to vulnerable groups and offer students experiential

learning opportunities. Overall, legal aid in the US operates through a decentralized system, where states and

counties design their own models, but all are tied to constitutional guarantees and federal funding (Rønning &

Hammerslev, 2018). This paper focuses on a comparative examination of the structures and frameworks of legal

aid clinics operated by universities. The discussion highlights key aspects, including curriculum integration, the

range of legal services offered, the extent and nature of student participation, and the requirements for

student participation, and the supervisory frameworks that ensure quality and accountability. By analyzing these

components, the discussion highlights how different legal, cultural, and educational contexts shape the role of

legal aid clinics as both learning environments and mechanisms for delivering justice. The analysis further

identifies the strengths and limitations of each model, providing insights into how Malaysian law schools can

refine their clinical programs by drawing from the more mature U.S. approach. Ultimately, this comparison

seeks to illuminate pathways for developing a more structured, pedagogically sound, and socially responsive

In Malaysia, CLE is still in its developing phase. There is a dearth of empirical data reviewing the setup of CLE

in public law schools in Malaysia and assessing its role as a teaching and learning strategy in legal education

The clinic serves as both a hub for free legal aid services and a hands-on learning platform for law students to

develop their skills while giving back to society. This initiative provides hands-on learning while fostering a

strong sense of civic responsibility among students. Similarly, Klinik Bantuan Guaman Universiti Malaya

(KBGUM) is managed by final-year law students under the supervision of academic staff and professional

lawyers. Clients are offered a structured consultation process, which includes case evaluation and legal advice,

with referrals made to the appropriate legal bodies where necessary. However, in Malaysia, academic credit for

participation in legal clinics is not yet consistently formalized across all institutions. Many legal aid clinics

operate more as cocurricular or voluntary platforms. This means students may not always receive formal

For example, at the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau (HLAB), students commit to a two-year academic and clinical

civil matters across courts, administrative bodies, and legislative settings. Under the guidance of seasoned

trial techniques. Only courses listed on the official “Approved List” are recognized for experiential credit,