JUNE 25 — In less than a week, the Judiciary will bid farewell to one of its most distinguished.
The first woman Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat, has reinvigorated the Judiciary by leading the third branch of government with integrity, intellect, courage, and dignity. She leaves on 1 st July 2025.
Two other Federal Court Judges who are retiring soon also deserve mention: Tan Sri Datuk Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim and Tan Sri Datuk Nallini Pathmanathan.
Each of them has demonstrated the sterling qualities that make a Judge of the Federal Court the crème de la crème of Judges. It is Judges of the ilk of the three mentioned, who have propelled the Malaysian Judiciary to international recognition and repute, and have made our Judiciary one of the most respected. Recent international surveys and reports testify to this. We should be proud of this monumental achievement.
It is thus utterly mystifying why these three outstanding Judges appear to have been singled out to NOT receive the six-month extension under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution. That, too, at a time when we are short of senior and experienced Judges. Why the exclusion, when it is undeniable that they have acquitted themselves in the best traditions of the Bench? One only has to read their judgments to appreciate why we are incredulous, and believe that their non-extension is a profound mistake. The concern is also the negative perceptions that this failure to extend their tenure may give rise to.
There is a perception that this is retribution for their having decided cases in a particular way not in line with the wishes of the powersthat be. There is also a perception that this is intended to be a chilling message to other Judges to “toe the line”. Yet others believe it is because certain political interests must be served in return for patronage or support.
Rightly or wrongly, these perceptions strike at the foundation of the Judiciary, and erode the independence of the Judiciary. Further, the incessant delays in making appointments to the Judiciary and, now, in deciding on a simple matter such as an extension, breed unnecessary speculation and uncertainty in the Judiciary and in the minds of the public.
Conclusion
Much is left to be desired in this unacceptable treatment of the Judges. The Judiciary, as the third branch of government, is equal in status to the other two — Parliament and the Executive. Equal must mean equal, regardless of expediencies.
A Government that came into power with the support of the people for its solemn promise of building strong and independent institutions and checks and balances, will lose that trust and support if the Judiciary is undermined.
We urge the Government not to allow any backsliding in preserving, promoting and protecting the independence of the Judiciary, as this would hurl us into a past that Malaysians would rather forget.
Past presidents of the Malaysian Bar:
Zainur Zakaria, Mah Weng Kwai, Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari, Yeo Yang Poh, Ambiga Sreenevasan, Ragunath Kesavan, Christopher Leong and Steven Thiru.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.