Former Bersih chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan said today that a royal commission of inquiry is necessary to investigate allegations of judicial interference, if only to vindicate "honest" judges.
As Ambiga told the Democracy Fest 2019 in Kuala Lumpur today, those who undermine the judiciary – the "life and blood of a nation" – must be made to answer for their actions.
"I believe in confronting the past before fixing the future. So that we won't repeat the same mistakes over and over again. You (must) dig deeper and find out what the problems are.
"I want a strong institution so it does not matter – or it matters less – who is in power. The (judicial) institution must operate to check all abuses of power," she said.
"There are many judges who do honest work and carry out their functions with integrity.
"But I still advocate an inquiry to vindicate those who have carried out their function properly, but to also ensure those who had undermined the system... to answer for their actions."
The allegations
Ambiga, who formerly sat on the Institutional Reforms Committee, was referring to recent allegations which have rocked the judiciary and led to calls for the establishment of an RCI.
Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer (photo) recently alleged that certain members of the judiciary were aiding private parties to defraud the government.
Hamid said this in a 63-page affidavit filed in support of lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo's suit against chief justice Richard Malanjum over two cases of alleged judicial interference.
According to the affidavit, the government would enter into contracts with political nominees and later renege on the deals. This would allow private parties to claim compensation, and the government recording "a consent judgment accepting liability and agreeing to assess damages."
Sangeet is seeking a declaration that the chief justice failed to defend the integrity of the judiciary in relation to her late father Karpal Singh's sedition appeal as well as the unilateral conversion of M Indira Gandhi's children.
This followed a claim from lawyer Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla last year that an unnamed senior judge meddled in the decision to acquit Karpal.
Haniff said he would only reveal the source of his information when and if an RCI or a tribunal is convened.
Aside from the claims made in his affidavit, Hamid revealed during a law conference last year that he was reprimanded by a senior judge for writing a dissenting judgment in Indira's case. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.