AGC dismisses claims of judicial crisis, defends appointment process

Free Malaysia Today

08-07-2025

The AGC said the process is proceeding in accordance with the Federal Constitution, and that any suggestion of a crisis is unfounded.
PETALING JAYA : The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has rejected calls for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) and a parliamentary select committee to investigate alleged irregularities in judicial appointments, saying the situation does not amount to a constitutional crisis.
In a statement today, the AGC said the process was proceeding in accordance with the Federal Constitution, and that any suggestion of a crisis was unfounded.
'Discrepancies in timing or procedure related to appointments do not automatically amount to a constitutional crisis,' it said.
Citing Article 122B of the constitution, the AGC said the appointment of superior court judges is made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the prime minister, following consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
The AGC said that while Parliament may examine institutional governance matters through its committees, appointments under the Federal Constitution must be handled carefully so that the roles of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and prime minister do not become a matter of 'political polemics'.
'It is inappropriate to politicise the role of the prime minister or the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Both institutions must operate independently under the constitution,' the statement said.
The AGC was addressing demands by Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli and several other PKR MPs for an RCI and a parliamentary select committee hearing following delays in the appointment of top judicial positions, including the chief justice.
Responding to allegations of procedural shortcomings, including claims that Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) meetings were convened without adequate notice, the AGC said the commission was empowered to regulate its own procedures.
'In urgent situations, it is common for meetings to proceed with short notice if all members agree. Procedural matters should not invalidate JAC deliberations unless there is clear evidence of bad faith or prejudice,' said the AGC.
The AGC also cautioned against 'speculative' accusations involving a Federal Court judge allegedly influencing judicial decisions and reassignments. It said that JAC deliberations are classified and protected by law, and that such claims should not be equated with proven misconduct.
The AGC added that comparisons to the VK Lingam case in 2007, which led to a RCI, were 'unwarranted'.
'The current situation is different, as the allegations involve procedural concerns and assumptions not supported by solid evidence,' it said.
The AGC concluded by urging all parties to uphold the rule of law and the separation of powers, warning that unwarranted public pressure or political narratives could undermine institutional integrity.
Claims of a constitutional crisis surfaced ahead of the mandatory retirement last week of then chief justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat and Court of Appeal president Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim.
While it remains unclear who will be appointed to fill the two top posts, Chief Judge of Malaya Hasnah Hashim is currently serving as acting chief justice while Federal Court judge Zabariah Yusof has been made acting Court of Appeal president.
Yesterday, Sarawak PKR information chief Abun Sui Anyit criticised calls for an RCI as unwarranted and potentially damaging to public confidence in the judiciary.
Citing Article 131A of the Federal Constitution, he said that a Federal Court judge is empowered to perform the duties of the chief justice in the interim, ensuring that the court continues to function without disruption.
He also stressed that the appointment of the chief justice is not the sole responsibility of the prime minister, but a process involving four key institutions: the JAC, the prime minister, the Conference of Rulers, and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.