Press Statement: Interest of the institution of judiciary is best served by refusing the extension

In any Like Minded and Reasonable Person

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:31:32 +0100

In any Like Minded and Reasonable Person, the least they can do is to offer their resignation. Thus, to restore the dignity of the Bench, the CJ ought to know when to hand his letter in without the need to "ask" for it. Maybe he is waiting for his Pension. So, if that is so, what dignity is there left? No need to ask whether his term is to be extended. What for? To cover his tracks while he is able and still in office? Kerry Sin Yoong Ming - Kerry Sin Yoong Ming

Question of extension should not have arisen

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:10:17 +0100

I totally agree with the views expressed by the President. However I feel that given the magnitude and seriousness of the allegations against the CJ, the question of extension should not have arisen in the first place. The only right and noble step to take is to step down. I would have thought that there should not be any slightest risk in justice being compromised. The "video-clip" allegations cannot be dismissed outright as mere fanciful allegations. The 'conversations' implicating the CJ are just too serious. His denial to the minister do really look odd to me. I would have thought that his denial should have been made to the whole world and not to the minister. If it were a confession then it would have made sense. Maybe it was we do not know. Anyway, if the CJ has decided, against all conventions, to stay on, his terms should never be extended. Chong Phow Yew - Chong Phow Yew

Proud of you

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:09:12 +0100

Madam President, I am proud of you. Harjit Singh Pannu - Harjit Singh Pannu

Bar Power lies with unity

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:52:24 +0100

It is not envy but appreciation and thoughtful thanks for the things - big and small - that Ms Ambiga 'does' for the Malaysian bar. I am not figuring out when she will get her 'Datuk'ship; but to say the least, putting many Datuks on her chair, I just wonder if so much could have been attempted by any of them for and on behalf of the Bar. To care for and love the Bar, legal rights and public fairness within our nation - are particularly 'general' issues; but to love and care for oneself is mainly 'particular'. Many have not left this 'particular' sphere to get into being 'general'; and yet, as Generals, they 'command' our Head. Tan Peek Guat - Tan Peek Guat

New Poll

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:50:00 +0100

I agree with Stephen. A poll will be a good ground to maintain the respect for decorum while showcasing contrary thoughts. It should assist in any decision that the prime minister is deliberating on. I believe this is called democracy not interference. Having said that i also believe that everyone has a right to thier opinion whether right or wrong. Being an optimist myself I believe Right will prevail in the end while a little justification will make the rest understand. Isn't this what we have been fighting for all this time? (for the dear minister who thinks we are all crazy, please don't take "fighting" in its literal meaning) Kasthury Sellappan - Kasthury a/p Sellappan

Fully agreed

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:26:42 +0100

I support Stephen's stand that this poll is merely to express the members' opinion on whether the extension ought to be allowed, there should not be any worries on usurping the King's authority by doing so because our poll is not binding on anyone, it is just a poll amongst the members of the Bar. However, I think the Bar is duty bound to explain/clarify to the public on the true provisions under the Federal Constitution in respect of what had been referred to by the minister in his statement yesterday. That particular statement, in my view, is absolutely inaccurate even if those relevant provisions are given the simplest interpretation to their ordinary meanings. The public and, more importantly, the King needs to know what is true and what is not before any decision is made. Shim Wai Loon - Shim Wai Loon

EXERCISE OF 'PUBLIC' OPINION

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:13:05 +0100

My dear Krishna I agree with you that "the RIGHT to appoint the Chief Justice vests with the King" provided the qualification is added that "the POWER to do so vests with the King and His Majesty's brother Rulers in the Council of Rulers." With respect, the conduct of the poll does not interfere with that right and power. The poll tries to assess the opinion of Malaysian Bar members. The poll's result is not even binding. If your contention is right, then our Malaysian Bar president Ambiga Sreenevasan has usurped that right and power - a contention that is at best untenable. Reduced to brasstacks, the poll and its assessment of the non-binding opinion of Malaysian Bar members may well affect the EXERCISE of that right and power. The exercise of such an influence is consonant within any democracy where public opinion - not the manipulated variety - has a definite role to play for the public good or "pro bono publico." Surely, as a lawyer, you would not turn a hair at this legitimate exercise of public opinion in a democracy? After all, we in the Malaysian Bar must strike a careful balance between the idealism of Marcus Aurelius and the pragmatism of Augustus. And I am speaking as the eternal optimist whose idealism has been smashed on the rocks of reality far too many times! Stephen Tan Ban Cheng - Stephen Tan Ban Cheng

New Poll

Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:33:29 +0100

The Bar should not interfere with this. The right to appoint CJ vest with the King. Let's have some respect for decorum. Datuk Krishna Kumar a/l Subramaniam - Datuk Krishna Kumar