Justice for judges — Past presidents of Malaysian Bar
JUNE 25 — In less than a week, the Judiciary will bid farewell to one of its most distinguished.
The first woman Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat, has reinvigorated the Judiciary by leading the third branch of government with integrity, intellect, courage, and dignity. She leaves on 1 st July 2025.
Two other Federal Court Judges who are retiring soon also deserve mention: Tan Sri Datuk Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim and Tan Sri Datuk Nallini Pathmanathan.
Each of them has demonstrated the sterling qualities that make a Judge of the Federal Court the crème de la crème of Judges. It is Judges of the ilk of the three mentioned, who have propelled the Malaysian Judiciary to international recognition and repute, and have made our Judiciary one of the most respected. Recent international surveys and reports testify to this. We should be proud of this monumental achievement.
It is thus utterly mystifying why these three outstanding Judges appear to have been singled out to NOT receive the six-month extension under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution. That, too, at a time when we are short of senior and experienced Judges. Why the exclusion, when it is undeniable that they have acquitted themselves in the best traditions of the Bench? One only has to read their judgments to appreciate why we are incredulous, and believe that their non-extension is a profound mistake. The concern is also the negative perceptions that this failure to extend their tenure may give rise to.
The Judiciary, as the third branch of government, is equal in status to the other two — Parliament and the Executive. Equal must mean equal, regardless of expediencies. — Pexels pic
There is a perception that this is retribution for their having decided cases in a particular way not in line with the wishes of the powersthat be. There is also a perception that this is intended to be a chilling message to other Judges to 'toe the line'. Yet others believe it is because certain political interests must be served in return for patronage or support.
Rightly or wrongly, these perceptions strike at the foundation of the Judiciary, and erode the independence of the Judiciary. Further, the incessant delays in making appointments to the Judiciary and, now, in deciding on a simple matter such as an extension, breed unnecessary speculation and uncertainty in the Judiciary and in the minds of the public.
Conclusion
Much is left to be desired in this unacceptable treatment of the Judges. The Judiciary, as the third branch of government, is equal in status to the other two — Parliament and the Executive. Equal must mean equal, regardless of expediencies.
A Government that came into power with the support of the people for its solemn promise of building strong and independent institutions and checks and balances, will lose that trust and support if the Judiciary is undermined.
We urge the Government not to allow any backsliding in preserving, promoting and protecting the independence of the Judiciary, as this would hurl us into a past that Malaysians would rather forget.
Past presidents of the Malaysian Bar:
Zainur Zakaria, Mah Weng Kwai, Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari, Yeo Yang Poh, Ambiga Sreenevasan, Ragunath Kesavan, Christopher Leong and Steven Thiru.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
3 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Dr Zaliha: RM4b Madani City to be fully transferred to government after 25 years, no public funds involved
KUALA LUMPUR, June 25 — The government will take full ownership of the proposed Madani City in Putrajaya 25 years after its completion, Federal Territories Minister Datuk Seri Dr Zaliha Mustafa said today. She further said the RM4 billion development will be fully funded and maintained by the developer, Putrajaya Holdings, under a Build-Lease-Maintain-Transfer (BLMT) model. 'This project does not waste public funds, as claimed by some,' she wrote in a statement posted on Facebook. Dr Zaliha said Madani City would also provide 10,000 new housing units for civil servants, addressing a current backlog of more than 17,000 unfulfilled applications. She stressed that the development is a necessity, not a luxury, as demand for government quarters far exceeds existing supply. Madani City, located in Precinct 19 of the federal administrative captial, spans just 102 acres — about 0.8 per cent of Putrajaya's total land area. 'It will not replace Putrajaya,' she said, countering what she described as a common misconception. She added that the project was designed in line with the government's vision of a clean, healthy, advanced, safe and eco-friendly city. The name 'Madani' reflects values of humanity, balance, justice and sustainability, and is not a political label, she added. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced the Madani City project on June 3, and is expected to officiate the groundbreaking ceremony tomorrow.
Malay Mail
3 hours ago
- Malay Mail
In challenge against Malaysia's judge appointment process, lawyer seeks Federal Court ruling on 16 constitutional questions
KUALA LUMPUR, June 25 — A lawyer is now seeking the High Court's nod for him to bring 16 questions on constitutional law to the Federal Court, as part of his court bid to challenge the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) and its role in recommending candidates to be appointed as judges in Malaysia. Lawyer Datuk Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan Syed Ibrahim filed his application at the High Court this afternoon, asking the High Court to order that the 16 questions be referred to the Federal Court to be decided there. He also wants the High Court to stay his main lawsuit until the Federal Court decides on the 16 constitutional questions. When contacted by Malay Mail, lawyer Daniel Annamalai confirmed that his client Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan had filed the application to refer constitutional questions to the Federal Court. At the time of writing, the High Court is still scheduled to hear on July 16 Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan's main lawsuit, where he is seeking to invalidate both the JAC and the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 (JAC Act 2009). In his main lawsuit, he also wants the court to order the prime minister to follow the constitutional process for the appointment of judges without what he described as 'interference' by the JAC. Currently, the JAC filters and selects suitable candidates before recommending them to the prime minister. The prime minister can either accept the JAC's recommendations or ask the JAC to give alternative names. Civil society has noted that the prime minister is not required to say why he rejected the JAC's recommendations, and there are also no limits to the number of times he can reject the recommended names. Under the Federal Constitution's Article 122B, the prime minister then gives advice to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, who then appoints the top four judges (including the Chief Justice) and judges (at the Federal Court, Court of Appeal and High Court). What do the 16 constitutional questions cover? The 16 constitutional questions mainly cover areas such as whether the JAC Act 2009 is unconstitutional. The questions also cover issues such as whether the prime minister's role in the process of appointment of judges had been reduced or become meaningless because of the JAC. The 16 questions include: whether the JAC Act 2009 is inconsistent with the Federal Constitution's Article 122B; whether appointments of judges made according to the JAC Act can be challenged as invalid, if the JAC Act is found to be unconstitutional; whether the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's role and the prime minister's role under Article 122B(1) are unconstitutionally diminished by JAC's recommendations; whether the prime minister's constitutional role in advising the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is made 'redundant or meaningless' by the JAC's statutory mechanisms; and whether the appointment of judges upon an 'unelected' JAC's recommendation infringes the Federal Constitution's Article 4(1), 8(1) and 122B. In an affidavit filed today in court to support his application on the 16 constitutional questions, Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan argued that these questions are 'not academic or hypothetical'. He claimed the questions directly affect the validity of all appointments of judges made in Malaysia since 2009. He argued that Article 122B gives the prime minister 'absolute discretion' to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the appointment of judges. He also said the Federal Court as the Federal Constitution's guardian should decide on the 16 constitutional questions — which include whether the JAC Act is constitutional and consistent with Article 122B.
Free Malaysia Today
3 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
PDP-SUPP feud won't affect GPS election chances, says academic
A compromise between PDP and SUPP is likely to be negotiated behind closed doors, according to a political analyst. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : The recent spat between state government coalition partners Progressive Democratic Party (PDP) and Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP) will not jeopardise the re-election chances of the ruling Gabungan Parti Sarawak, according to an academic. James Chin of the University of Tasmania said the dispute was mainly a fight between PDP president Tiong King Sing and SUPP president Dr Sim Kui Hian, both attempting to expand their parties' influence. James Chin. It was 'highly unlikely' that opposition parties would be able to capitalise on the feud, Chin said, as the constituencies fought over by the two parties are not part of the opposition parties' voter bases. 'Ba'kelalan is a Orang Ulu area, while Engkilili and Bawang Assan are Dayak-majority areas,' he told FMT. He said PDP 'has been emboldened' with the admission of members from the now-dissolved Parti Sarawak Bersatu into the party and was now 'trying to expand their foothold in Sarawak' by going after SUPP seats, traditionally in urban Chinese areas. PDP has traditionally been in Dayak areas. In the 2021 state election, Tiong was fielded by GPS and won in Dudong, a traditional SUPP seat, causing much ire within SUPP. Tensions have spiked between the two parties, with SUPP's Dudong chief Wong Ching Yong declaring it an 'open conflict' on Monday. Last year, three assemblymen from PSB joined PDP, taking with them three traditional SUPP seats. PSB, led by Wong Soon Koh until its dissolution, is a splinter of SUPP. After joining PDP, Wong was subsequently named its vice-president. Chin said PBB, the largest party in GPS, would not intervene in this dispute and may even 'watch what is happening with glee'. Awang Azman Pawi. However, socio-political analyst Awang Azman Awang Pawi of Universiti Malaya said PBB would not allow the spat to last too long and will negotiate a closed-door compromise between the two parties. He said PDP seeks Engkilili, Bawang Assan and Ba'kelalan because they believe SUPP has failed to gain ground in the first two seats, and PDP has also done a lot of groundwork among the Lun Bawang and other ethnic communities in Ba'kelalan. Awang Azman said the allocation of these seats will be dependent on each party's past performance and contribution to GPS, as well as their acceptance by the grassroots. Chin said it is too early to know which party will be fielded in these seats as seat negotiations have not started, but added that GPS has usually allowed the incumbent parties to recontest their seats.
