KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 13): The judiciary must get used to being judged in the court of public opinion, especially in high-profile cases, which attract the most comments, a lawyers’ group said.

Lawyers for Liberty executive director Eric Paulsen said this was the norm in most modern and democratic countries.

“We do not see the judiciary in the United Kingdom, Australia or Canada expecting citizens to read judgments before commenting, as suggested by the chief justice,” Paulsen said in a statement.

He was referring to Tun Arifin Zakaria’s statement at the launch of the 2016 Legal Year last week where he was reported to have said that judges could accept genuine criticism but not name-calling or remarks running down the judiciary.

Arifin, who came to the defence of the Court of Appeal majority ruling in the case of M. Indira Gandhi, also referred to former de facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim’s blog posting criticising the judiciary in the unilateral religious conversion case.

Arifin said those who wanted to criticise judges must read the grounds of their judgments.

Paulsen said the judiciary could only command public confidence and respect through its conduct and in judgments which gave the appearance of impartiality, independence and integrity.

“Any criminal investigations or charges in defence of the judiciary can only reflect negatively and bring further public scrutiny and criticism,” he said.

He said an independent judiciary was fundamental to democracy as it distinguished a democratic state from a totalitarian one.

“In dispensing justice, the judiciary must not fear or resent public criticism including unjustified, intemperate or even crude ones.

“No comparable democracies around the world have as many lawyers, elected representatives, opposition politicians and activists in the dock for statements made against the judiciary as Malaysia,” he said.

Paulsen said justice was not a cloistered virtue and this was all the more true in the Internet and social media age where the empowered citizenry had a greater access than ever to news and information, as it happened and outlets to voice their views immediately.

“In today’s demand for greater transparency and accountability, the judiciary cannot escape close scrutiny of its conduct and judgments, as the public have high expectations of its role as the custodian of justice and the Federal Constitution,” he added.

Paulsen said Arifin was also inaccurate for claiming that no one has ever been arrested or charged for criticising the judiciary for its judgments.

He said Arifin should note Zaid was currently under investigation for his comments in Indira's case.

He said elected representatives N. Surendran , Sivarasa Rasiah , Ng Wei Aik, cartoonist Zulkiflee SM Anwar Ulhaque , and activists Mohd Fakhrulrazi, Lawrence Jayaraj, Hassan Karim, and S. Arutchelvan were charged with sedition in relation to comments about Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy conviction.