I found the following statement in today's Malaysiakini report:
However, the lawyer’s office clarified that "Arulampalam does not represent Balasubramaniam, but was just his representative."
OK, I'm not so good at the Legalese language, but this one left me befuddled... A does not represent B but was just his representative... ??? Perhaps they mean that A is not the official legal counsel/representative, but just a stand-in representative. Or it was another misquotation by the press.
Maybe they'll clarify tomorrow. Or maybe they'll issue another statutory declaration. Commissioners of oaths must be making good money these days.