Should we comment on judicial extensions?
LETTER | A very good question has been posed in a joint statement by the eight past presidents of the Malaysian Bar.
They asked why there has not been an extension for six months under Article 125 for three Federal Court judges, particularly Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, and two other very senior Federal Court judges, all of whom are retiring very soon.
First of all, I agree with the part of the statement that said that the judges are the crème de la crème of judges.
I think many in the profession will agree that they were among the best for the last few years. But this also leads to a dilemma.
If there were an extension, there would be speculation among the public about why their tenures have been extended. At the same time, if they are not being extended, there would be negative speculation over it.
What really strikes me is the part of the statement saying there is a perception that this is retribution for having decided cases in a particular way, not in line with the wishes of the powers that be.
Now, there is a question mark here.
What are those cases that have been decided not in line with the powers that be? It must be very clear with proof and evidence.
Of course, there is freedom of speech and opinion, which is good, but another argument could be made that their statement was itself an interference in the judicial appointment process.
The statement also says it gives a chilling message to the other judges to toe the line. It also cites the belief that certain political interests must be served in return for patronage or support.
I find this an unbelievable and unacceptable claim.
The independence of the judiciary from Parliament and the executive is paramount. And we can't erode it.
But without proof, it is unacceptable to say there is such a perception.
We most certainly should not express or repeat wild and damaging theories about the appointment process.
Ultimately, Article 125 gives the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the power to extend judicial appointments or not.
It is enshrined in the Federal Constitution. So let it be.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
3 hours ago
- The Sun
Malaysia can be Kyrgyz Republic's gateway to ASEAN
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia, which is currently the sixth largest exporter of semiconductors globally, can be Kyrgyz Republic's gateway to ASEAN, said Deputy Investment, Trade and Industry Minister Liew Chin Tong. In return, Malaysia can tap on the strength of the republic as its entry point to Central Asia's region, he said. Kyrgyz Republic, which is a landlocked nation, borders Kazakhstan, China, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. The nation was Malaysia's fourth-largest trading partner among Central Asian countries last year, with total bilateral trade valued at US$8.74 million (RM40 million). 'Malaysia used to portray itself as a trading nation but Malaysia is in many ways a sophisticated middle technology nation, including being the sixth largest exporter of semiconductors globally. 'Malaysia and Krygyz Republic are both non-aligned in geopolitics. Such middle ground positioning is hugely important as the world transitions from a unipolar world into a multipolar one,' he said during a meeting between the republic's President Sadyr Zhaparov with Malaysian business communities. Liew also emphasised Malaysia's commitment to build stronger bonds of friendship and cooperation with Kyrgyz Republic. 'With the valuable support of Kyrgyz's leadership, Malaysia is confident that we can explore and reap many opportunities together for a brighter and more prosperous future for our people,' he said. Zhaparov today attended a meeting with representatives of Malaysian companies to explore business cooperation and investment opportunities between the two countries. The meeting, which lasted for over an hour, also witnessed four document exchange ceremonies between Malaysian companies and the republic, involving sectors such as mining and livestock. The president, who arrived in Malaysia yesterday for a two-day official visit, was given an official welcome at the Perdana Putra Complex today, followed by a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Zhaparov also spent nearly an hour visiting the Malaysian Parliament. He departed for home today after wrapping up a two-day official visit to Malaysia.
Malaysiakini
5 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Should we comment on judicial extensions?
LETTER | A very good question has been posed in a joint statement by the eight past presidents of the Malaysian Bar. They asked why there has not been an extension for six months under Article 125 for three Federal Court judges, particularly Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, and two other very senior Federal Court judges, all of whom are retiring very soon. First of all, I agree with the part of the statement that said that the judges are the crème de la crème of judges. I think many in the profession will agree that they were among the best for the last few years. But this also leads to a dilemma. If there were an extension, there would be speculation among the public about why their tenures have been extended. At the same time, if they are not being extended, there would be negative speculation over it. What really strikes me is the part of the statement saying there is a perception that this is retribution for having decided cases in a particular way, not in line with the wishes of the powers that be. Now, there is a question mark here. What are those cases that have been decided not in line with the powers that be? It must be very clear with proof and evidence. Of course, there is freedom of speech and opinion, which is good, but another argument could be made that their statement was itself an interference in the judicial appointment process. The statement also says it gives a chilling message to the other judges to toe the line. It also cites the belief that certain political interests must be served in return for patronage or support. I find this an unbelievable and unacceptable claim. The independence of the judiciary from Parliament and the executive is paramount. And we can't erode it. But without proof, it is unacceptable to say there is such a perception. We most certainly should not express or repeat wild and damaging theories about the appointment process. Ultimately, Article 125 gives the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the power to extend judicial appointments or not. It is enshrined in the Federal Constitution. So let it be. The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
JPN says action has been taken after claims of Pakistanis obtaining ICs resurface
PUTRAJAYA: The National Registration Department (JPN) has confirmed that the allegation involving Pakistani nationals obtaining blue identity cards in Sabah is an issue that has resurfaced after first going viral in 2019. In a statement Wednesday (June 25), the department said action had been taken against one Mohd Izaz Abit after he was found to have used another person's birth certificate to obtain the identity card. "The identity card was also seized after a confession was obtained from the individual and the application sponsor," said JPN. Allegations that several Pakistani nationals had obtained blue identity cards had gone viral, with posts stating, "The Sabah JPN office is always filled with Pakistanis applying for ICs," and featuring images of the identity cards in question. According to the department, a check was also conducted on the identity card numbers and it was found that the individuals concerned were Malaysian citizens by operation of law under Article 14 of the Federal Constitution. JPN said that Abd Rauf Hamzah was a Malaysian citizen by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b), while Mohd Abzah Ulamai Dar held citizenship under Article 14(1)(a). The department said that Said Bashar Shah Zadar was a citizen by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b), with confirmation that his father had been a Malaysian citizen since March 6, 1958. It added that each applicant was responsible for proving their eligibility when applying for Malaysian citizenship. "The consideration process is subject to the conditions under Part III of the Federal Constitution, the Citizenship Rules 1964 [L.N.82/1964], as well as relevant laws on matters such as marriage registration, adoption, legitimacy of children, and immigration regulations," it said. JPN said that although the conditions allowed for submission of a citizenship application, approval was not guaranteed, as Malaysia, as a sovereign nation, does not grant citizenship arbitrarily or confer any special privileges. - Bernama
