Removing PM's role in judicial appointments a necessary reform

 

YOURSAY | ‘Honourable judge did the right thing - voicing out a wrong to be righted.’

Nazri pans outgoing CJ for suggesting political interference in judiciary

EmEmKay: Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Man’s call to remove the prime minister’s role in judicial appointments is not just a procedural suggestion but a necessary reform to safeguard judicial independence.

By advocating for an independent body to handle these appointments, she aims to ensure that judges are selected based on qualifications rather than political affiliations.

As Malaysia navigates its legal landscape, the discussions surrounding Tengku Maimun’s proposal underscore the broader need to evaluate and potentially update laws that are considered archaic.

Transitioning to a judicial system that prioritises independence and meritocracy is crucial for the evolving democratic framework of the country.

In Malaysia, several former prime ministers have faced serious corruption allegations, the most notable being Najib Abdul Razak and the 1MDB scandal.

Such cases raise legitimate concerns regarding the potential for political manipulation in judicial appointments.

If the prime minister holds the power to appoint the chief justice, it may lead to a compromised judiciary, where political loyalty supersedes merit and integrity.

To preserve the rule of law and public confidence in the judicial system, Malaysia must address these concerns.

Strengthening judicial independence by reforming the appointment process is crucial to preventing future abuses of power and fostering a transparent legal system that upholds justice.

The conversation around this issue is vital as Malaysia continues to evolve and confront the challenges of governance and corruption.

MS: Tengku Maimun, who has earned a stellar reputation for absolute integrity and impartiality, was appointed to her post by former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

At the time of her appointment, she was perhaps unaware of how low politicians, embraced by the Madani fellow, would go.

She did not know then the kind of vicious personal attacks she would be subjected to by former foreign diplomat Nazri Abdul Aziz’s kleptocratic party both during and after the trials which jailed its felonious leader.

She did not, for even a moment, imagine that a sitting PM would cast serious aspersions on the judiciary when he declared, in a petulant fit, that the trials of his newfound friends and the verdicts were hurried and motivated by vengeance.

Every one of these attacks by ranking members of the Madani regime hinged on the fact that the CJ was appointed by a prime minister they detest.

This is really the reason the most honourable chief justice has called for the “removal of the prime minister’s role in appointing judges” and reassure everyone, including the country’s third-rate politicians that the judiciary is “free from any perception of political influence”.

Nazri knows all that for sure. But given that Madani holds on to the felon’s “you help me, I help you” rule, he has seen it fit to question her.

ScarletMarlin0996: We are really ashamed, and shocked by such remarks from an ex-ambassador and ex-justice minister.

As the current CJ said, her suggestion is to improve the system, make it better. Is that not the right thing to do? All right-thinking fair-minded people will support the CJ!!

Cyclonus: Just because one was appointed under a flawed system doesn’t mean that he or she has to blindly be loyal to it.

Such typical Umno thinking.

The honourable judge did the right thing - voicing out a wrong to be righted.

Freethinker: The system works when the PM is not corrupt. Since an ex-PM was found guilty of “you know what crime”, a change is needed in this context.

We see how abuse of power happens to stop an investigation against a PM. If the matter had not been raised Internationally, but committed within Malaysia alone, the case would never come to light as the PM can simply put it under the Official Secrets Act and arrest anyone trying to raise the matter.

It’s the magnitude of the crime that it’s too big even for PM to cover it up. We see corrupt and incompetent officials trying to cover up the crime on behalf of “you know who”.

We see how a PM can change the inspector-general of police, attorney-general overnight with little to no justification for doing so in the midst of an investigation.

If a corrupt leader gets to appoint a judge, that would be the beginning of the end of Malaysia’s rule of law.

People should defend judicial independence and only people with sound legal judgment should be appointed.

See how the US woke judge is destroying the country today. Malaysia would not survive it if it happened here.

OrangePanther1466: It is time to do away with the six-month extension prerogative for federal judges and incorporate it into the mandatory retirement age which will be 66 years old. Better still if all judges’ mandatory age can be increased to say, 80 years.

We need wise and experienced judges who are usually at their prime later in life. Keeping the retirement age at 66 years old deprives the nation of the wisdom and experience of these justices.

Come this June, we will be losing one of the best brains in the judiciary. I would urge the PM and His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to exercise the six-month extension of service of Tengku Maimun.

In the meantime, the government should work towards amending the justices’ retirement age. This is not a controversial proposal and getting the two-thirds majority should not be a problem. - Mkni