That was the theme of last night’s dinner hosted by the Bar Council to set the stage for Pak Lah to make his announcement on moves by the government to reform the judiciary.

Was justice delivered? Was trust renewed?

You can read the full text of Pak Lah’s speech HERE  .

Malaysiakini report on the dinner HERE

MSM reports HERE and HERE.

Blogosphere reports HERE and HERE

Still no explicit apology to the 6 judges of the 1988 crisis. Instead, and quoting Pak Lah,In recognition of the contributions of the six outstanding judges, the Government has decided to make goodwill ex gratia payments to them. Gentlemen, I do not presume to equate your contributions, pain and loss with mere currency, but I hope that you could accept this as a heartfelt and sincere gesture to mend what has been’.

I’m happy for the 6 judges and their families. Apology or no, it brings closure of sorts to a tragic injustice inflicted on good men by one man’s determination to reatain power by all means, evil or otherwise.

Some may say that justice was in fact delivered last night.

Has not one man been overlooked, though?

 Justice Syed Ahmad Idid.

Forced to resign from the judiciary in 1996 for whistleblowing on the corrupt goings-on in the judiciary vide a 33- page letter albeit written anonymously.

If you are in the dark about this man and how he was unjustly treated by the Mahathir regime, read related articles HERE  , HERE and HERE.

Pak Lah, will you not make another sincere gesture to mend what has been done to this man?

As for the proposed Judicial Appointments Commission, I’m afraid it does not go far enough given that, quoting Pak Lah again, ‘the constitutional prerogative of the Prime Minister to put forward names to DYMM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang Di Pertuan Agong will remain…’

Pak Lah, you have yourself publicly laid blame on Mahathir for the blows inflicted on the judiciary in 1988. You have witnessed, then, how one man wielded power to destroy a most important constitutional institution.

In your own words uttered last night, ‘For many, the events of 1988 were an upheaval of the nation’s judicial system… For me, personally, I feel it was a time of crisis from which the nation never fully recovered…’ and ‘…we can no longer leave such an important institution to hope and chance. The system must have built-in safeguards to prevent potential abuse…’

Therefore, the proposed Commission must take the place of the Prime Minister in advising the DYMM Agong on candidates for appointment to our superior courts. There must be no room whatsoever for any possibile executive interference in the appointment of the judicial arm of government. Otherwise, we leave open our system of judicial appointments to potential abuse and manipulation if this country is ever blighted with another Mahathir.

Pak Lah had said last night, in relation to this proposed Commission, that ‘consultation on the workings and the structure of the Commission will involve primary stakeholders. All will have a chance to provide their input to the Government… The government has set the ball rolling. We have put forward initial, but vital, steps. Now it is for all parties concerned – the judiciary, the Bar, civil society and the public at large – to also play their respective roles in facilitating these reforms. Whatever our differences, we share the same idealism for our nation’s judiciary. Let us work through our differences’

It is therefore imperative that the Bar Council and civil society NGOs and NGIs with the requisite expertise step forward and be heard during the processes involved in making this proposed Commission a reality.

It is also vitally important that the establishment of this Commission be fast-tracked so that it will be in place before the present CJ, Hamid Mohamad, retires in September this year.

Why?

 Former UMNO man, Zaki, now President of the Court of Appeal, waits in the wings for that appointment that will make him the top dog judge of the land.

If that day should come to pass, would trust have been renewed?

To Zaid, I say you have done well in the short time you have been in cabinet. Much remains to be done, though.

As Ambi said last night, we expect you to keep busy!

12 Responses to “Delivering justice, maybe, but renewing trust?”

  1. Gan Says:

    Judicial reforms should encompass the following:

    1. correcting the current Judiciary eg
    a. people like Zaki CANNOT be allowed to be the top dog of the Judiciary
    b. review questionable judgements where justice was seen to be denied eg Adorna case
    2. estabishing a mechanism to ensure that the Judiciary is independent, righteous, just, transparent (all “godly” attributes) so that qualified blemish free judges are chosen to uphold justice without fear or favour in accordance to the Federal Constitution.
    3. Separation of powers must be clearly defined and upheld. AG’s/Police’s roles and responsibilities to be re-visited to ensure clear demarcation.

    I hope Pak Lah’s speech is not another occasion of “noise words” resulting in another “KOSONG-NESS” !!

    If Pak Lah and Zaid is sincere, translate those words into an action plan for the rakyats to watch over.

  2. Hkengmacao Says:

    Haris,

    The dinner was a disappointing event to me. Every time when Pak Lah want to announce something important to the country, I usually hope to see and hear something more significant. Really, I shouldn’t put so high hope on Umno or BN, as we can see, they can’t even ‘reform’ themselves, yet how to expect they ‘reform’ the Judiciary?

    Let us hope Pakatan Rakyat can take over the Federal Government soon. They can do a better job for sure.

    Malay, by nature, are ‘forgiving’ in nature. But for this Judicial Crisis, those involved in it, in particular M******, must first repented before expecting the victimised judges let bygone be bygone.

  3. Goodbar Says:

    Quote -‘the constitutional prerogative of the Prime Minister to put forward names to DYMM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang Di Pertuan Agong will remain…’ – Unquote.

    Quote – ‘…we can no longer leave such an important institution to hope and chance. The system must have built-in safeguards to prevent potential abuse…’ – Unquote.

    To safeguard and prevent the judiciary institution from wanton interference and abuse, the Judicial Appointments Commission should be answerable only to the King, with consensus and advice from the Parliament.


  4. What about the JC’s and Judges appointed by Fairuz before his not so graceful retirement ? Most of them are junior officers who followed him like lap dogs when touring the courts nation wide . Hope the present CJ have the courage and dignity not to confirmed them as High Court Judges . If his lordship or the honest judges read this blog , please purge these passengers who were so desperate to the extent of even shedding crocodile tears before Ahmad Fairuz and lobbying through Mrs Ahmad Fairuz to be promoted .

    The ball is at your lordship’s feet , dear CJ .

  5. kolaar Says:

    I had said then in 1988 that in 10 yrs, 20 yrs or even 100 to 200 years time that black episode in our legal history would be addressed and apologies extended.

    I was having dinner, at around the moment when Pak Lah was to announce regret, I rushed to the TV, so that I can hear his words clearly. Then, there was no apology, no regret! I will wait for that word ’sorry’- the most difficult word. If not my children or their children would here it one day.

  6. Allen Tan Says:

    Trust?

    I will not trust the system of appointing judges. I hope judges be voted by MPs.

  7. arianna Says:

    Dear Haris,

    Can honour be bought or redeemed with money?

    Sounds a lot like Umno’s money politics and being exercised of all place, in front of the Bar members (they were applauding, I heard).

    Me? I prefer an apology anytime AND the promise to the letter, an independent judicial commission without the prime minister poking his head.

  8. shar101 Says:

    Haris,

    Sometime back, I asked you on how do upstanding members of the Bench voice their concerns regarding the rot in the judiciary and you replied something to the effect that they would have to resign from their post to be heard.

    In other words, we can conclude, the present system precludes democratic debate within an institution which ironically is supposed to uphold the very same rights for the nation.

    If there is to be judicial reforms as stated by AAB, why is he holding onto that last bit of executive decision which made the judiciary a mess since 1988? Is he saying to the legal fraternity “Here are ten minor rings of the Law, I’ll keep the One Ring to rule them all”.

    Reforms? Humbug! AAB’s comforting sound bytes can fool most people (including some members of the legal fraternity, I might add, if the ’standing ovation’ is to be believed) and he tops it up with throwing loose change at the victims using taxpayers’ monies with impunity (another executive decision colored with continued arrogance).

    It would be simplistic to expect a ‘fast-tracked’ apology from AAB (representing the government) while a tribunal or judicial review of 1988 would take ages to organise, let alone, in trying to obtain a justifiable outcome. Was this event then a compromise of sorts? Or was it another effort at political expediency to save AAB’s battered image?

    Meanwhile, the expulsion of the six judges will remain as public record.

    At least until a future PM with wisdom and courage decides otherwise.

  9. raj raman Says:

    Still playing the clean guy image MR.PM?

    Openly umno still playing the corrupt game.Now they are offering bribe to former judges.I do agree this victims to be paid with money and apologies.

    The main culprit is MM but there also the whole umno/barisan MP supported MM.
    Matter of principle,umno who suck our tax payer money should pay this judges.Unless umno not able,aution their properties.Umno filthy rich,mca also rich but i dont know about mic.( mr.samy do you left anything for mic or u swindle mic like maika )

    Why umno still want to suck us dry for their corrupt attitude.AAb still telling lies.Still enjoying tax payer money with grand speech and dinner.

    WHO GOING TO PAY FOR YOUR LAST NIGHT DINNER MR.PM.UMNO OR STILL THE POOR RAKYAT.ARE YOU LISTENIG MR.PRIME MINISTER.???
    RAJ RAMAN.VOMITTING BLOOD DUE TO LAST NIGHT DINNER.

  10. mekyam Says:

    It is quite disappointing if this recompensation (with or without apology) is considered a moral victory. Seriously, how did it right any wrong?

    How can this crass confirmation that there is a price tag on everything be part of an initial move to restore Malaysia’s tattered Judiciary?

    Shouldn’t the reversal of judgement against Tun Salleh et al be done through another Tribunal?

  11. unilight Says:

    The judiciary shall be independent but only answer to Parliament so should the ACA, then perhaps Malaysia can be saved. What say you people…..?

  12. Beh Sai Kong Says:

    The Bar Council gave the PM a standing ovation. I can imagine that he is in much need of this. But consider this: In effect the Bar Council got nothing more than a speech. Even should the promise of a judiciary appointments commission be realised, that is for the distant future and it only covers one vital aspect of judiciary revival. The past, however, is conveniently, cheaply and summarily dismissed with a plain tribute and promise of ex-gratia payments without an apology. For 20 years of humiliation and anguish, the former Lord President and senior justices get this and no more.

    I deeply regret the Bar Council’s easy acceptance of the PM’s sweetener. I wasn’t expecting more from the PM but certainly I was expecting much more from the legal profession. These cheap offers from the powers that be mean very little. It will not address the blatant conflict of interest that UMNO (lama or baru) committed through its then president and PM in 1988. The entire judiciary arm was taken on and incapacitated. Till today no wrongdoing in this matter has been officially determined nor acknowledged. Surely the lawyers will know that until and unless a duly established review is undertaken, there can be no closure to this horrendous act of hijacking the constitutional power and functions of the judiciary. Therefore, despite all the promises made by the powers that be, such a dastardly act can take place again to aid the interests of the powers that be.

    What is the Bar Council’s standing ovation standing on?

    Beh Sai Kong


Leave a Reply