Judges must do their homework if oral submission time capped, say legal eagles

PETALING JAYA: Legal experts say the proposal for lawyers to make oral submissions within 20 minutes will only be effective if the appellate court judges have read up and understood the facts of the case before the hearing.

They said a bench that came prepared would only have to direct lawyers to make submissions on key issues before a decision is made.

Former chief judge of Malaya Haidar Mohamed Noor said it was important for judges in the Court of Appeal and Federal Court to read the written submissions submitted by lawyers earlier.

He said only then would they be able to direct the lawyers to highlight the salient points and save the court time and resources.

“The panel could also ask the counsel to elaborate on his or her written submissions for the purpose of clarity,” he told FMT.

Haidar was responding to Chief Justice Richard Malanjum’s proposal that lawyers appearing before appellate court judges be given only 20 minutes to make oral submissions to expedite appeal hearings.

“A shorter submission period will enable lawyers to raise the more important points for the attention of judges,” Malanjum said in a speech after attending a ceremony to announce the appointment of nine judges to the Federal Court and Court of Appeal.

Malanjum also said the practice of limiting oral submissions was common in the UK and US.

“Don’t save the best point for last, but advance it first before the judges,” he said, adding that the suggestion would be made into a practice direction if the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the Bars representing lawyers were agreeable.

Haidar said in order for the proposal to be effective, judges should not interrupt when lawyers are presenting their submissions.

“Their train of thought will be derailed if the judges stop them and raise questions,” he said, adding that it was better for the bench members to listen attentively instead.

‘Judges must narrow down issues’

Lawyer Bastian Pius Vendargon said he would expect judges to have identified all the issues that need to be clarified during the oral submission.

“Before the hearing, the court must narrow down the issues and inform parties to limit their submissions to those important points,” said Vendargon, who often appears for clients in civil matters.

He said some of the appeals were simple and straightforward while others were complex and long-winded.

“Judges must also look at the facts of a case and the law in a wholesome manner. Justice will not be served if the issues are attended to in isolation,” he added.

Bastian also noted that some experienced judges were already reducing oral submission time by giving an indication to lawyers that they were familiar with the facts of the case and directing the counsel to submit on the law instead.

Lawyer Salim Bashir said some latitude should be given to criminal appeals as the life and liberty of the accused was at stake.

“Their counsel must be given a fair hearing and cases must not be speedily disposed of at the expense of justice.”

Salim, who frequently appears in the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court in murder and drug trafficking appeals, said acquittals and convictions were dependent on the facts of the case.

He also urged judges not to prejudge any appeal after reading the written submissions, but to make a decision only after they hear the oral submissions.

“The bench could opt to give another 10 minutes if lawyers are canvassing decisive points when the life and liberty of accused persons are at stake,” he added. - FMT