Latest news with #ActingChiefJustice
Malay Mail
5 days ago
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Procedural flaw in JAC proceedings? — Hafiz Hassan
JULY 8 — Concerns have been raised about the short-notice urgent meeting allegedly called by the Acting Chief Justice Datuk Seri Hasnah Hashim. Reference has been made to Section 13(2) of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009, which states that at least ten days' notice in writing or by electronic mail shall be given to the members of the Judicial Appointment Commission (JAC). It may be said that the 10-day notice is procedural in nature. JAC members, who are no ordinary folks, may consent to a shorter notice having regards to attending circumstances. Or they may raise it (the short notice) with the Acting Chief Justice. Chief Justice of Malaya Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim is pictured at the Opening Ceremony of the 2025 Legislative Year at the Putrajaya International Convention Centre (PICC) January 8, 2025. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa Let us not be like the Malay saying: 'lebih sudu dari kuah'. When the short-notice urgent meeting was disclosed to the media, I would respectfully say in Malay: 'ada yang lebih sudu dari kuah'. One has to be mindful of Sections 15 and 16 of the JAC Act. Section 15(c) says that no act done or proceeding taken under the Act shall be questioned on the ground of an omission, a defect or an irregularity not affecting the merits of the case. Section 16 empowers the JAC to determine its own procedure. So, can one say that the alleged short-notice urgent meeting was flawed for non-compliance with Section 13(2) of the Act? * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
6 days ago
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Secrecy of JAC proceedings must not be compromised — Hafiz Hassan
JULY 7 — Acting Chief Justice Datuk Seri Hasnah Hashim had reportedly called for an urgent meeting of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), according to sources. The unnamed source stated that the meeting was scheduled for 3pm on July 4, despite Section 13(2) of the JAC Act 2009 requiring at least 10 days' written notice to be given to commission members. 'The purpose of the urgent meeting is unclear,' a source said. It is concerning that the sources cited Section 13(2) of the JAC Act but ignored Section 32 of the same Act. Section 32 mandates and obligates every member, officer and servant of the JAC to secrecy in the course of his duties, whether during or after his tenure of office or employment. According to the author, the acting Chief Justice Datuk Seri Hasnah Hashim must act against the sources if they contravene Section 32. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa If the Acting Chief Justice had called for a meeting not in compliance with Section 13(2), then it is members of JAC who must raise it with the Acting Chief Justice. These members are no ordinary folks. They are learned people of the law. It is, again, concerning that the sources should disclose the alleged call for an urgent meeting to the media when Section 32(1) says that no member, officers and servants of JA 'shall disclose any information or document obtained by him in the course of his duties'. Section 34(4) says any person who contravenes the provision 'commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both.' The Acting Chief Justice must act against the sources if they contravene Section 32. Secrecy of proceedings of JAC must not be compromised. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
