Malaysian Bar praises appointment of Justice Wan Ahmad Farid as Chief Justice
Bar president Mohamad Ezri b Abdul Wahab (pic) recalled a 2022 case where Justice Wan Ahmad Farid recused himself from a high-profile matter involving the admission of Queen's Counsel Jonathan Laidlaw in a case concerning former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. In June 2022, Justice Wan Ahmad Farid stepped down from hearing the application by Laidlaw, who intended to represent Najib in his final appeal regarding the misappropriation of RM42mil belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd.
Justice Wan Ahmad Farid had recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest, as a family member was an active politician in the same party as Najib. He emphasised the importance of maintaining public confidence in the judiciary, stating, "The public perception of the independence of the judiciary should not be put in doubt," and reminded all that "an independent judiciary is a precious gift to any society."
Mohamad Ezri noted that these statements reflect a deep understanding of the judiciary's sacred role in upholding the rule of law. "We hope that under the stewardship of these new judicial office bearers, the judiciary will continue to uphold the highest standards of independence, integrity, and service to the nation, reaching greater heights," he said.
The Bar also congratulated Justice Datuk Abu Bakar Jais on his appointment as the Court of Appeal president and Justice Datuk Azizah Nawawi as the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak. Despite welcoming these appointments, Mohamad Ezri expressed concern over ongoing vacancies in the Federal Court, Court of Appeal, and High Court, urging for them to be filled promptly and transparently.
Veteran lawyer Datuk Baljit Singh Sidhu described Justice Wan Ahmad Farid's appointment as "unprecedented" in Malaysia's judiciary, noting his experience in the High Court and Appellate Court.
"Interesting times," Baljit remarked, hinting at the challenges and opportunities ahead for the new Chief Justice.
The Federal Court Chief Registrar's Office confirmed on Friday (July 18) that His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, has approved the three judicial appointments, with the swearing-in ceremony scheduled for July 28.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Safeguarding Judicial Independence
TWO weeks ago, Malaysia's legal community reached a tipping point when lawyers, led by the Malaysian Bar Council, embarked on a 2.6km 'Walk to Safeguard Judicial Independence.' Clad in black and armed with a 65-page memorandum, they pressed the Prime Minister's Office to curb executive overreach in judicial appointments. At the heart of their grievances was the abrupt decision to deny six-month tenure extensions to three of the judiciary's most senior figures – former Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim, and Federal Court Judge Tan Sri Nallini Pathmanathan – as each approached the constitutionally mandated retirement age of 66. Cancel anytime. Ad-free. Full access to Web and App. RM 13.90/month RM 9.73 /month Billed as RM 9.73 for the 1st month, RM 13.90 thereafter. RM 12.39/month RM 8.63 /month Billed as RM 103.60 for the 1st year, RM 148 thereafter.
Malaysiakini
3 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Vape bans: Slippery slope for legal governance
LETTER | In July 2024, the High Court ruled that the Kedah state government's move to ban gaming licences, effectively shutting down Sports Toto operations in the state, was unconstitutional. The court found that state authorities had overstepped their powers by refusing to renew licences issued under federal law, thereby infringing on the rights of a legally licensed business and violating the Federal Constitution. This landmark ruling is more than just a win for the gaming industry; it underscores a critical principle: state governments cannot override federal law at will. Yet just months later, we are seeing the same pattern emerge again, this time with the vape industry. Kedah has announced it will no longer renew licences for vape-related businesses, with the goal of a complete ban by 2026. Other states such as Pahang, Terengganu and Perlis are following suit. This trend raises urgent questions about the balance of power in our federal system. What started with gaming licences is now extending to vape. Tomorrow, will it be food and beverages? Or wellness and lifestyle services? If states are allowed to selectively shut down federally regulated sectors, Malaysia risks descending into legal fragmentation, where trade and commerce depend more on local politics than national law. Act 852: A necessary legal anchor Rather than allowing states to adopt unilateral bans, the federal government must focus on fully enforcing Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852) across the country. Act 852 was passed after years of consultation and debate. It represents a balanced and structured approach to regulating smoking and vaping products, protecting youth, ensuring product safety, and reducing public health risks while allowing regulated access to adults. Its successful enforcement is not just a health issue; it is a legal imperative. If states are allowed to disregard it through political or moralistic motivations, the Act's legitimacy will be compromised. From a legal standpoint, only a consistent, centralised framework can ensure that public health regulations are enforced uniformly, fairly, and in accordance with constitutional principles. Legal uncertainty hurts rule of law, public confidence One of the hallmarks of a sound legal system is predictability. Businesses, consumers, and civil society should be able to rely on a stable set of laws and policies. When that stability is undermined by states choosing to selectively ban certain industries, it weakens the rule of law and opens the door for selective enforcement, politicisation of trade, and judicial overload from legal disputes. This also affects the very communities the bans claim to protect. Instead of driving behaviour change, bans often push products into illicit channels, where there is no age restriction, no safety oversight, and no taxation. This undermines the public health objectives of Act 852 and increases enforcement burdens. The way forward: Uphold the law, not politicise it The lesson from the Sports Toto ruling is clear: state governments do not have the authority to override federal laws with blanket bans. Vape should not be the next legal battleground. The federal government must assert the supremacy of laws passed by Parliament and ensure that public health policies are governed by national interest, not fragmented by state agendas. Act 852 provides the legal tools to regulate the vape industry effectively. What's needed now is not more bans but better enforcement. Malaysia must decide whether it wants to be governed by clear laws or discretionary bans. The answer will determine whether our legal system continues to uphold constitutional order or gives way to a patchwork of conflicting state policies. The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
Malay Mail
3 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Vape bans: A slippery slope for legal governance — R Paneir Selvam
JULY 21 — In July 2024, the High Court ruled that the Kedah state government's move to ban gaming licences, effectively shutting down Sports Toto operations in the state, was unconstitutional. The court found that state authorities had overstepped their powers by refusing to renew licences issued under federal law, thereby infringing on the rights of a legally licensed business and violating the Federal Constitution. This landmark ruling is more than just a win for the gaming industry; it underscores a critical principle: state governments cannot override federal law at will. Yet just months later, we are seeing the same pattern emerge again, this time with the vape industry. Kedah has announced it will no longer renew licences for vape-related businesses, with the goal of a complete ban by 2026. One of the hallmarks of a sound legal system is predictability. Businesses, consumers, and civil society should be able to rely on a stable set of laws and policies. — Pexels pic Other states such as Pahang, Terengganu and Perlis are following suit. This trend raises urgent questions about the balance of power in our federal system. What started with gaming licences is now extending to vape. Tomorrow, will it be food and beverages? Or wellness and lifestyle services? If states are allowed to selectively shut down federally regulated sectors, Malaysia risks descending into legal fragmentation, where trade and commerce depend more on local politics than national law. The role of Act 852: a necessary legal anchor Rather than allowing states to adopt unilateral bans, the federal government must focus on fully enforcing Act 852 across the country. Act 852 was passed after years of consultation and debate. It represents a balanced and structured approach to regulating smoking and vaping products, protecting youth, ensuring product safety, and reducing public health risks while allowing regulated access to adults. Its successful enforcement is not just a health issue; it is a legal imperative. If states are allowed to disregard it through political or moralistic motivations, the Act's legitimacy will be compromised. From a legal standpoint, only a consistent, centralised framework can ensure that public health regulations are enforced uniformly, fairly, and in accordance with constitutional principles. Legal uncertainty hurts the rule of law and public confidence One of the hallmarks of a sound legal system is predictability. Businesses, consumers, and civil society should be able to rely on a stable set of laws and policies. When that stability is undermined by states choosing to selectively ban certain industries, it weakens the rule of law and opens the door for selective enforcement, politicisation of trade, and judicial overload from legal disputes. This also affects the very communities the bans claim to protect. Instead of driving behaviour change, bans often push products into illicit channels, where there is no age restriction, no safety oversight, and no taxation. This undermines the public health objectives of Act 852 and increases enforcement burdens. The way forward: Uphold the law, not politicise it The lesson from the Sports Toto ruling is clear: state governments do not have the authority to override federal laws with blanket bans. Vape should not be the next legal battleground. The federal government must assert the supremacy of laws passed by Parliament and ensure that public health policies are governed by national interest, not fragmented by state agendas. Act 852 provides the legal tools to regulate the vape industry effectively. What's needed now is not more bans but better enforcement. Malaysia must decide whether it wants to be governed by clear laws or discretionary bans. The answer will determine whether our legal system continues to uphold constitutional order or gives way to a patchwork of conflicting state policies. *This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
