When six-month extensions had been granted to six Federal Court judges who were set to retire this year, lawyers - especially senior lawyers - did not create any hullabaloo. Yes, the decision was accepted without demur.
However, many lawyers smell a rat when the tenure of three federal court judges who are known to possess impeccable integrity has not been duly extended by the government.
The three federal court judges are Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Court of Appeal president Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judge Nallini Pathmanathan.
It has become public knowledge that several former presidents of the Bar Council have duly urged the government to extend the tenure of the aforesaid three top judges, especially the CJ. And one of them was a former lawyer for the prime minister himself, Zainur Zakaria.
Former law minister Zaid Ibrahim, the National Human Rights Society (Hakam), and former deputy law minister of law from DAP, Ramkarpal Singh, have also joined the chorus recommending that the government extend the tenure of the CJ.
Hakam has not only called for transparency and equal treatment in the extension of judicial tenures, but it has also expressed deep concerns over reports of selective practices in granting extensions to senior federal court judges.
Unfortunately, the plea for such an extension seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
In fact, the media reports that Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has slammed alleged attempts to lobby the government into extending the CJ’s tenure.
Misplaced and misguided
Unfortunately, the prime minister has not only failed to hear the aforementioned voices from the respected members of the legal fraternity, but he has even treated them as part of the move attempting to politicise the judiciary. Truth be told, I find his imputation to be extremely baffling.
With the greatest respect to the prime minister, his gut feeling that the call by a slew of respected members in the legal fraternity for the government to grant the required extension of tenure in favour of the CJ, Abang Iskandar and Nallini as part of the move to lobby, is clearly misplaced and utterly misguided.
It has, first and foremost, nothing to do with any form of lobby at all. On the contrary the call is merely to assist him in making a right and wise decision.
Anyway, when the top echelon of Malaysia’s judiciary is overshadowed by uncertainty and deepening controversy, Malaysians, let alone members of the legal fraternity, certainly have every right to air their grievances.
In my view, the prime minister should have the necessary humility to duly consider the plea by respected members of the Bar as part of good counsel and words of advice.
Even former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak used to say that the era of the government knowing best is over. Whether Najib practised what he preached is another matter altogether.
The prime minister reminds all of us that when civil servants, or judges have reached their retirement age, they do not get their tenure extended automatically upon retirement. No one, let alone lawyers, are disputing that. Unfortunately, that is not the issue here.
Au contraire, the issue relates to the alleged selective extension of tenure favourably to some judges to the exclusion of others, particularly the well-deserved candidates.
Consistently inconsistent
The prime minister also claims he does not have the absolute power to decide on the appointment of judges in that such a decision has to go through a process involving the Judicial Appointments Commission, obtaining the consent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and a discussion by the Council of Rulers.
Considering Malaysia strictly adheres to the notion of a constitutional monarchy, the powers conferred to the Agong or the Council of Rulers in exercising their sole prerogative or discretion are duly circumscribed by the federal constitution; hence, such powers are very limited in number.
Most of the time, powers to be exercised by the king are to be carried out only after the prime minister has duly given his advice. And many constitutional experts hold the view that such advice ought to be duly acted upon.
Finally, Anwar seems to be consistently inconsistent in his decision.
His government’s decision - viewed from any perspective - to extend Azam Baki’s contract as the MACC chief commissioner despite the latter’s purported dubious records in the past and Anwar’s perceived reluctance to extend Tengku Maimun’s tenure despite her stellar performances and her solid integrity is an ill-advised decision. - Mkini
HANIPA MAIDIN is a former deputy law minister.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.