Judicial commission to discuss appointments of top judges

Chief Justice Richard Malanjum (second from left) with several top judges at the opening of the 53rd Judges’ Conference here today. (Bernama pic)

PUTRAJAYA: The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) will discuss succession plans in the judiciary as seven Federal Court judges are retiring this year, Chief Justice Richard Malanjum said.

“Of course we have a plan but (we are) not obliged to reveal as it is classified under the Official Secrets Act,” Malanjum told reporters after opening the 53rd Judges’ Conference here today.

The commission proposes names to the prime minister who advises the Agong on judges’ appointments after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.

Malanjum will leave office in April, while Chief Judge of Malaya Zaharah Ibrahim will leave office in May following their six-month extension.

Court of Appeal president Ahmad Maarop and Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak David Wong Dak Wah will retire in May and August respectively.

Federal Court judges Ramly Ali will retire next month, Balia Yusof Wahi in March, and Alizatul Khir Osman Khiruddin in April.

Malanjum, who is also JAC chairman, said the group had not thought about calls to consider appointing lawyers straight to the Federal Court.

Malanjum also said a nine-member Federal Court bench which two days ago heard appeals by two foreigners who were convicted for drug trafficking will deliver its ruling next month.

The top judge said this when it was pointed out that several judges, including him (Malanjum) would be retiring.

Others who would retire soon but sat on the bench were Ramly, Balia, Alizatul and Wong.

Malanjum said Section 78 of the Courts of Judicature Act allowed a judgment to be delivered if the majority of judges still remained in office.

“Sometimes judgments are delivered earlier or late as it can be very tough for judges to study them (submissions and appeal records),” he said.

The case is being keenly followed, as the two foreigners – Alma Nudo Atenza and Orathai Prommatt – have raised constitutional issues.

They said Parliament had exceeded its authority when an amendment to a provision in the Dangerous Drugs Act (DDA) 1952 was approved to secure a conviction against accused persons charged with trafficking.

Counsel Gopal Sri Ram said Parliament was only empowered to make laws and not to declare a law which infringed on the judiciary’s authority.

Both appellants are also arguing that Section 37A of the DDA which allowed the prosecution to rely on multiple presumptions also violated their constitutional right to life under Article 5. - FMT