The Malaysian Bar is deeply concerned with the uncertainty surrounding the extensions of tenure for The Right Honourable Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat, the Right Honourable President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Datuk Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim, and the most senior Federal Court Judge (other than the judicial Office Bearers) The Honourable Justice Tan Sri Datuk Nallini Pathmanathan1. This comes in the light of the reported2 six-month extensions granted to five other apex court Judges3.
While the maximum extension permissible is six months and is a matter of discretion, neither is it a reward. It is a responsibility to continue working for the benefit of the nation and the cause of justice. It is unusual for the Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal or senior Federal Court Judge not to be granted 6-month extensions. These extensions are far from ceremonial and afford these senior judges, amongst others, time to conclude a lifetime of service to the Bench and nation and to get their judicial affairs in order. Further, such extensions can also be used productively to conclude cases pending before them and the time to complete the writing of their judgments, amongst others.
These three judges exemplify the critical qualities essential for appellate and apex court positions: unwavering judicial independence and integrity, upholding the rule of law without fear or favour, administrative competence, public credibility, and a deep commitment to constitutional principles and human rights. The Malaysian Bar maintains4 that all future judicial and Judicial Appointments Commission (“JAC”) appointees should embody these attributes, whilst also taking into consideration seniority and diversity ie gender and ethnic representation.
The cumulative effects of these extensions are also crucial in the light of the vacancies in the Judiciary, particularly in the superior and apex courts. These extensions would enable the Federal Court to continue to function at the highest levels and is essential in upholding the rule of law and maintaining public confidence in the Judiciary. A judiciary that operates at less than full strength, particularly at the appellate level, risks the erosion of judicial efficiency, the accumulation of backlogs, and delays in the dispensation of justice and, if left unchecked, a denial of justice itself.
According to the JAC5, there are at present 29 vacancies among superior court Judges: two in the Federal Court, three in the Court of Appeal, and 24 in the High Courts (comprising 13 in Malaya and 11 in Sabah and Sarawak). There does not appear to be ready data for projected vacancies (taking into account impending retirements at all levels) but it is clear that the numbers would be even greater than this.
|
Court Level |
Total Positions |
Current Judges |
Vacancies |
|
Federal Court |
11 |
9 |
2 |
|
Court of Appeal |
32 |
29 |
3 |
|
High Court (Malaya) |
75 |
62 |
13 |
|
High Court (Sabah & Sarawak) |
19 |
8 |
11 |
|
Total |
141 |
112 |
29 |
Coupled with the fact that six Federal Court Judges are projected to retire by the end of this year (of whom, even if three are extended, all six would still retire by January and February 2026), the Judiciary faces an impending leadership vacuum as all four Office Bearers of the Judiciary fall within this category. The delays in appointments, promotions and extensions are no longer tenable and must be addressed posthaste.
The Judiciary is one of the three branches of the Government, the others being the Legislature and the Executive. Modern constitutional democracies the world over recognise these three branches of Government as being necessary in upholding the Separation of Powers and the Rule of Law. The independence of the judiciary is a critical tenet in upholding this constitutional equilibrium. The vibrancy and robustness of modern democracies are measured by adherence to such constitutional principles.
The granting of extensions to some judges but not others could lead to unwanted and unfounded adverse perceptions, particularly as they relate to the most senior Judges of the Federal Court. Any perceived erosions of our constitutional infrastructure may not only adversely affect the rule of law but harm a country’s commercial and economic attractiveness for investment and business.
The Malaysian Bar calls upon the JAC and all relevant decision-makers to ensure that all appointments, extensions, promotions and the process of identifying and recommending the incoming Office Bearers of the Judiciary and the appointments and promotions of appellate and apex court Judges continue to reflect the highest standards of transparency, integrity, objectivity, and fidelity to the Constitution. These high judicial offices demand character, integrity, credibility, and an unwavering commitment to justice — Malaysia deserves no less.
Anand Raj
Vice-President
Malaysian Bar
5 June 2025
1 “Tenures of Chief Judge of Malaya, two Federal Court judges extended”, The Edge, 13 March 2025.
2 “Extend Tengku Maimun, Abang Iskandar and Nallini's tenures, human rights society urges govt”, The Edge, 22 May 2025.
3 The Right Honourable Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Tan Sri Dato’ Abdul Rahman bin Sebli, The Right Honourable Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Hasnah binti Dato’ Mohammed Hashim, and Federal Court Judges Tan Sri Datuk Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, Dato’ Zabariah binti Mohd Yusof, and Datuk Hanipah binti Farikullah.
4 “Press Release | The appointment of Tan Sri Hj Mohd Dzaiddin Hj Abdullah as the Chief Justice of the Federal Court” by Haji Sulaiman Abdullah, Malaysian Bar website, 20 December 2000; “Press Release | Seniority Should Be the Overriding Factor in Elevation of Judges” by Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor, Malaysian Bar website, 29 November 2018;“Press Release | Seniority important factor in judicial appointments” by Ambiga Sreenevasan, Malaysian Bar website, 5 April 2007.
5 Statistics on Post and Vacancies of Supreme Court Judges, Judicial Appointments Commission Malaysia website, retrieved 4 June 2025.