Ex-CJ's 'other view' and our compromised public institutions

 

“Dangers lurk in all systems. Systems incorporate the unexamined beliefs of their creators. Adopt a system, accept its beliefs, and you help strengthen the resistance to change.”

- Frank Herbert

Former chief justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad’s ”other view” of the judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali’s fiasco attempts to present our public institutions as bodies which are independent and defined by integrity.

My friend, former law minister Zaid Ibrahim, makes more or less the same case here.

The potency of their argument rests not only on the independence and integrity of our public institutions but also on the rakyat’s faith in those institutions.

While Zaid makes it very clear that he is confident in the democratic and legal safeguards in place, Hamid’s (above) piece displays Manichean undertones that reflect the highly partisan nature of the polity, not to mention defects in our public institutions

I will give you an example. He invites readers to ponder this question: “Had judge Nazlan acquitted Najib, would the Bar Council issue a similar statement?”

Now this question is part of the problem. It is a good rhetorical trick because it implies that the Bar Council is invested in seeing former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak in an orange jumpsuit and that certain bodies wage their battles on partisan grounds and align with political groups with the same agenda.

And the question would be a legitimate one if our public institutions were truly independent and public officials are known for their integrity. This is not the case here.

Forget about the reality of the allegations made by former Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer about the compromised nature of the judiciary that was never investigated by the relevant authorities.

Court of Appeal judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali

Instead, the relevant authorities are interested in the allegations of a blogger who has made all sorts of allegations against various political operatives throughout his career.

So my question is, why choose to “investigate” these particular allegations when Raja Petra Kamaruddin has made more sensational claims before?

Not to mention that in any functional democracy, the claims made by Hamid Sultan would be a priority because the independence and integrity of the judiciary would be paramount – but more importantly, the rakyat’s faith in the judiciary needs to be safeguarded.

P Ramasamy sums it up perfectly when he wrote: “Why are we paying so much attention to this fugitive in the UK (Raja Petra) apart from the fact that he has links with some disgraced public officials in the country?”

Judiciary and investigative bodies

Let us take another case when it comes to the independence and integrity of our public institutions.

When former inspector-general of police Abdul Hamid Bador made his allegations about a police cartel and the fact that a political operative was using the Special Branch for political purposes, what was the outcome of that compromised investigation?

The EAIC investigation discovered that there was nothing to see in this sorry episode.

The landscape of the Malaysian judiciary and investigative bodies is littered with the bloated fetid corpses of past scandals, corruption and political malfeasances, which is why anybody making the argument that the system should be trusted is at a disadvantage.

Honestly, it is not as if someone like Zaid would be ignorant of the compromised nature of the judicial, political and investigative system of this country.

Even more so, Hamid, whose other side argument rests on the public’s beliefs that any investigation carried out by the state is free of the taint of political interference.

Former law minister Zaid Ibrahim

Claiming that the free speech of people who are attempting to defend the judiciary – however compromised they are – in the grander narrative is simply gaslighting the rakyat

And for heaven’s sake, we had a former law minister, Umno potentate and all-around provocateur who claimed in 2019 that the attorney-general, chief justice and the finance minister posts should be reserved for Malays. Anything else would mean that the government is weak.

He said: "It is the duty of every prime minister and the government to defend the (Malay) privilege. However, the government is weak.

"Many things that never happened before are happening now - (look at the appointments of the) attorney-general, chief justice and finance minister.”

And if you think that Nazri Abdul Aziz is an outlier, remember the Malay dignity congress where one of the five resolutions presented at the Malay dignity congress was:

“This includes positions such as chief justice, attorney-general, chief secretary, inspector-general of police, chief of defence forces and other strategic positions such as the prime minister, deputy prime minister, chief ministers and menteri besar, finance minister, defence minister and education minister"

The same way that the Immigration Department ignores an interim court order and the establishment does not consider this as contempt of court. However, when five anonymous netizens do a drive-by in the comments section, a news organisation is fined half a million ringgit.

This should tell us something about the compromised nature of our public institutions.

Some folks think that gaslighting the rakyat will ameliorate the situation. All it does is confirm our slow progress to tinpot status. - Mkini

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.