•
Reject CJ's bid
for extension
The Bar Council notes the statement of the Minister
published in the New Straits Times that the King must act on the advice
of the Prime Minister in relation to the extension of the current Chief Justice.
This is the first time such an issue in relation to extension sought under
Article 125 has arisen. The Article provides that the extension of a Judge of
the Federal Court may be given “as the Yang di–Pertuan Agong may approve”. The
argument appears to be that this nevertheless requires the Yang di–Pertuan Agong
to act on the advice of the Prime Minister in accordance with the scheme under
the Constitution in relation to the appointments and promotions of Judges under
Article 122B. If that be the case, it would also require consultation with the
Conference of Rulers to provide the necessary checks and balances and to
preserve the core value of the independence of the Judiciary from the Executive.
Whatever the interpretation, the Yang di–Pertuan Agong is not precluded from
proferring a view nor from asking for information under Article 40. (Click here to poll: "Should the term of the current Chief Justice
which expires on Oct 31 be extended to a period of not more than 6 months?")
It is however unnecessary to enter into this constitutional debate at this
stage. There is a much larger issue at stake.
Whenever there is any hint of a scandal that cannot be dismissed as frivolous
(as with the video clip incident), involving an institution of high value such
as the Judiciary, and given the nature of the allegations and the importance of
the position held, it is necessary to take such steps as would best serve the
public interest and the interest of that institution. The overriding principle
is that, even though a finding has yet to be made in this regard, and we are
mindful that it has not been, it is crucial to act in the higher interests of
this critical institution, so that the “streams of justice” are kept pure, and
public confidence in the institution is restored or maintained. Nothing is more
important. Therefore in the case of any doubt or reservation, the course that
best serves the institution and the public must be taken. In these
circumstances, the best interests of the institution and of the public clearly
invite a withdrawal or, failing this, a refusal of the application for
extension.
Ambiga Sreenevasan
President
Malaysian Bar