New CJ known for hard work and quick decisions

An oft-repeated description of newly-appointed chief justice Md Raus Sharif by the legal fraternity is that he is a hard-working judge who would dispense justice swiftly.

When he was the Court of Appeal president - the No 2 position in the judiciary - Raus would not only preside over cases at the Federal Court, but also at the Court of Appeal.

As the Court of Appeal president, Raus' task is to empanel the Court of Appeal judges. Now, he will do that for the Federal Court.

Before being appointed the 14th chief justice, he would normally be seen presiding and disposing cases at the Court of Appeal on Fridays or be part of the Court of Appeal bench if he is not at the apex court.

Raus would also be seen personally handling case management for some cases at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court. Normally, these cases are the long-standing cases which have yet to be disposed or heard.

As he has already reached the age of 66 - the mandatory retirement age for judges - Raus is not expected to have a long stint as the chief justice. His contract expires on Aug 4.

Questions about his ability to leave a mark under such a short period were immediately raised. Raus believed that the nation's top judges work as a team and that matters more than his tenure.

"My tenure is another thing. But as I've said, I'll give my best shot," said Raus, adding that his main priority was to expedite criminal cases and clear the backlog.

Pioneer UM law grad

Raus was born in Rembau, Negeri Sembilan and completed Form Six at Sekolah Tuanku Abdul Rahman (Star), Ipoh.

He was among the pioneer batch that graduated from Universiti Malaya's Law Faculty in 1976 and obtained his Masters in Law from the London School of Economics in 1987.

Upon his graduation in 1976, Raus began his career as an attachment officer of the magistrate's court at Court Hill. He was then appointed a magistrate in Pontian, Johor.

Before being appointed as a judicial commissioner in 1994, he had served as a deputy public prosecutor in Kelantan and Terengganu and served as a Sessions Court president.

He had also served as legal adviser to the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, the Defence Ministry, Home Affairs Ministry, Finance Ministry, Malacca government and the Kelantan government.

He was made a full judge in 1996 and elevated to the Court of Appeal in 2008. A year later, he was appointed a Federal Court judge. He assumed the role of Court of Appeal president in 2011.

Raus is known among court reporters for writing short and easy to understand judgments. His judgments are rarely over 40 pages.

Notable decisions

Besides sitting in the Sodomy II trial, which unanimously upheld former opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim's conviction and sentence, Raus was also part of the bench in the majority judgment in the "Allah" case involving the Catholic weekly magazine "The Herald".

Interesting cases Raus has presided over included the dispute over the remains of Mount Everest climber M Moorthy. Raus at the High Court on Dec 28, 2005, ruled that since the Syariah Court had ruled that Moorthy was a Muslim, he would be buried under Islamic rites.

"The civil court has no jurisdiction and cannot act to review the Syariah Court's decision," judge Md Raus said, adding that Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution clearly stated that all matters pertaining to Islam should be handled by the Syariah Court.

Moorthy's family had argued that although he was legally a Muslim, he never practiced the religion and that his funeral should follow Hindu rites.

At the Federal Court, Raus famously ordered Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar and the police to arrest Muslim convert Mohd Ridhuan Abdullah for seizing his then 11-month old daughter in a unilateral conversion case involving Ridhuan's former wife M Indira Gandhi.

In the unanimous decision, he also had some harsh words for the recalcitrant Ridhuan for not wanting to bring Prasana Diksa back to court, where he said this kind of conduct could not be condoned by the court as this brought the administration of justice into disrepute.

“When the case did not turn in his (Ridhuan) favour, he refused to come to the court's jurisdiction. We are of the view that he must be apprehended and the committal order (for contempt) needs to be executed,” he said.

However, in the S Deepa case earlier, Raus decided on a split custody with Deepa's former husband N Viran @ Izwan Abdullah granted custody over their son whom he had already taken earlier while Deepa got the daughter who was already staying with her.

The Court of Appeal president in his 33-page decision said that if any change had taken place in the circumstances of the parties which warranted a reconsideration of the matter, the court was not bound by a former order, but would use its discretion to change the conditions, always bearing in mind the welfare of the children or infants affected.

Recently, Raus also controversially ruled in a majority decision that the apex court did not recognise the Iban customary practice of “pemakai menoa” and “pulau” regarding customary land ownership, so this was not enforceable in law.

While the Court of Appeal had earlier ruled that the punishment of not abiding with the requirement to give 10-days notice before an assembly under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, is unconstitutional, Raus overruled that decision at another Court of Appeal panel by saying the requirement to give 10 days' notice was constitutional.

He made the decision in the case of the public prosecutor versus PKR Johor executive secretary R Yuneswaran.

At the Court of Appeal five years ago, Raus was also known for controversially allowing former national bowler Nor Afizal Azizan not to serve jail sentence for the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl, after allowing his release on a personal bond of RM25,000 for good behaviour.

However, in his 13-page decision, the top judge wrote that the punishment of a bond on good behaviour did not exonerate the person of the offence he had committed.

"It will form part of the person's criminal record and will remain there for the rest of his life. In this case, the appellant was given a suspended prison sentence. He has to behave himself for a five-year period. If he behaves he will escape the jail sentence," he ruled.- Mkini