Press Statement: Bar Council’s immediate response to the Report in the Borneo Post dated 10 June 2008
Contributed by Ambiga Sreenevasan
Tuesday, 10 June 2008 10:51pm
The
disclosures made today by High Court Judge Ian Chin J are both startling and
damning. They speak to forms of executive and other interference in the
judiciary which have undermined the institution. Judges must make known and if
necessary make public any such acts of interference by any party.
One of the more significant disclosures made by the Judge is that he was
informed by another High Court Judge Muhammad Kamil Awang J (as he then was),
that he had received a telephone call from the then Chief Justice asking the
latter to dismiss an election petition that was heard in 2001 in relation to the
Likas constituency elections in March 1999. This corroborates the similar
disclosure made by Muhammad Kamil Awang J himself in his judgment on that
election petition namely in the case of Harris Mohd Salleh v The Returning
Officer, Ismail Majin & Ors [2001] 3 CLJ 161. In that case, the Judge said:
“The only guide to a man is his conscience, the only shield to his memory is the
rectitude and the sincerity of his action. In my view, it is an insult to one’s
intelligence to be given a directive over the phone that these petitions should
be stuck off without a hearing, and above all, it is with prescience conscience
that I heard these petitions. God has given me the strength and fortitude, as a
lesser mortal, to act without fear or favour, for fear of a breach of oath of
office and sacrifice justice, and above all to truly act as a judge and not a
“yes-man”.”
Another disclosure by Ian Chin J about the conduct of a “boot camp” for judges
and judicial officers was equally shocking and should be investigated.
These allegations and all the other disclosures made by Ian Chin J must of
course be comprehensively looked into, not only by the Chief Justice but by all
other relevant authorities. Judges, both present and past, must be encouraged to
come forward and provide information of any such instances of interference so
that further action may be taken.
PRECIENT CONSCIENCE? written by Stephen Tan Ban Cheng,
Wednesday, June 11 2008 04:00 pm
It may be cogent to remind my fellow lawyers interested that the appropriate passage cited above is on Page 183 of the Judgment delivered by Justice Muhammad Kamil Awang.
I believe it should read "prescient conscience" instead of "prescience conscience." Any comments to the contrary?
Stephen Tan Ban Cheng
Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
2012 Bar Council Subscription Click the link above to download Circular 072/2012 pertaining to the 2012 Bar Council subscription, including the payment guide and a set of Frequently-Asked-Questions.
2012 Hotel Corporate Rates Attending seminars? Going for a holiday? Click on the link above to check out the list of hotel corporate rates for Members of the Bar, which is updated regularly.
Bar Council Bookshop Read MORE … but pay LE$$! Members enjoy a 20% discount on LexisNexis publications at the Bar Council Bookshop. Click on the link above for the list of available titles.
International Malaysia Law Conference (26 to 28 Sept 2012) Hurry up! The countdown continues and the current promotion rate ends 30 June 2012. Don't miss what is going to be the best conference in the region! On top of that, if you sign up with 5 or more people from the same organisation, we will give you a 10% group discount. Click on the link above to register.
Talk on Summary Judgement (25 May 2012) Organised by the Selangor Bar Committee, this talk will take place at 5:00 pm, at the Selangor Bar Committee Auditorium, on 25 May 2012 (Friday). The talk will be conducted by Ramesh Supramanian. Click on the link above for more details.
Seminar on Tax Issues in Financial Transactions (25 May 2012) Organised by the Kuala Lumpur Bar Professional Development Committee, this seminar, featuring S Saravana Kumar, will take place at 3:00 pm, at the Kuala Lumpur Bar Auditorium, on 25 May 2012 (Friday). Click on the link above for more details.
Dialogue with Criminal Law Practitioners (26 May 2012) Organised by Bar Council, this dialogue will take place at 10:00 am to 12:00 pm, at the Raja Aziz Addruse Auditorium, Bar Council, on 26 May 2012 (Saturday). Click on the link above for more details.
Conference on Competition Law (31 May 2012) Organised by Bar Council with the support of LexisNexis, this conference will take place at 8:30 am to 4:00 pm, at Renaissance Kuala Lumpur Hotel, on 31 May 2012 (Thursday). For more details or to register, please contact Vilashini Vijayan (03-2050 2095; vila@malaysianbar.org.my). Click on the link above for more details.
Talk on What Clients Want (7 June 2012) Organised by the KL Bar Practitioners' Affairs Committee, the talk, presented by Ong Eu Jin, will take place at 5:00 pm, at the KL Bar Auditorium, on 7 June 2012 (Thursday). Click on the link above for more details.
4th LAWASIA Family Law Conference, Penang (13 and 14 July 2012) Supported by Penang Bar Committee and the Malaysian Bar, this conference, themed “The New Global Family: Emerging Trends and Challenges to Family Practice”, will take place at Traders Hotel, Penang, on 13 and 14 July 2012 (Friday and Saturday). Click on the link above for more details.
News/Notices 
The
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 110/2012: Seminar on Introduction to ICC Arbitration: An Insight into the 2012 ICC Rules
It may be cogent to remind my fellow lawyers interested that the appropriate passage cited above is on Page 183 of the Judgment delivered by Justice Muhammad Kamil Awang.
I believe it should read "prescient conscience" instead of "prescience conscience." Any comments to the contrary?
Stephen Tan Ban Cheng