Friday 29 Mar 2024
By
main news image

PUTRAJAYA: The nation’s top judge and the attorney-general have taken exception to criticism of the judiciary by lawyers, saying it is unwarranted and amounts to an attack on the administration of justice. Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria and Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail in their speeches at the opening of the legal year on Saturday made special reference to The Malaysian Insider report on May 22.

The article titled “Judiciary comes under attack for not respecting the rule of law” had said that most Malaysian judges fail to recognise that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that was the reason public law litigation is dead in this country.

“I must say it is disheartening to note that a handful of lawyers have repeatedly made use of public media and public fora to make unjustified criticism against the judiciary, and more so on the decisions of the court, knowing full well that as members of the Malaysian Bar they are obliged to act with candour, courtesy and fairness.  And any attack on the judiciary which undermines the confidence of the public in this institution amounts to an attack on the administration of justice,” Arifin said.

Abdul Gani, who departed from his set text, said there were reports in the alternative media in which lawyers made scurrilous remarks about the judiciary. “Criticism must be made at the right place and manner. One should not criticise for the sake of criticising.” Abdul Gani said the Attorney-General’s Chambers had a responsibility to protect and defend the integrity of the judiciary.

In the report, lawyer Tommy Thomas said there is a category of judges who over the years merely paid lip service to the supremacy of the constitution. “That has not changed much now and I will likely lose constitutional cases before them,” he told a panel discussion at a public forum on the Rule of Law and Human Rights in Malaysia, jointly organised by the Malaysian Bar and the United Kingdom-based Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law.

Thomas, who has been in practice since 1976, also said it was difficult for litigants to get leave in the High Court to mount a challenge against arbitrary decisions made by public authorities. “The attorney-general, who is the custodian of public interest, comes to court to object to the leave application,” he had said.

Thomas said lawyers could argue brilliantly by submitting cases and legal principles on constitutional and administrative laws before these judges, but it is difficult to woo them.

“So public law in this country is in a sad state and constitutional law is especially, really dead,” he added.

Thomas, a regular feature in the superior courts in Putrajaya, said he had also observed that only the presiding judge in the Federal Court dominates proceedings although a five-man bench sat to hear appeals.

“Four other judges who flank the chairman on his right and left are normally silent and do not contribute much during proceedings.” Thomas was responding to a question from the floor on whether a full quorum should hear public interest cases.

Another speaker at the forum, lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar was also critical about the judiciary and said unlike the past, the judiciary no longer has prolific members on the bench. Malik said the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) which was set up in 2009 is not transparent “as we do not know what they do behind closed doors”.

Responding, Arifin, the chairman of JAC,  said the selection process could not be conducted in public and an annual report of the JAC is tabled in Parliament. — The Malaysian Insider

 

This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, on January 12, 2015.

      Print
      Text Size
      Share