SEVERAL former Malaysian Bar presidents today urged the government not to allow any backsliding in preserving, promoting and protecting the independence of the Judiciary.
With three top judges set to retire, they said it was mystifying why the trio 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?" they asked in a statement today.
The signatories of the statement are Zainur Zakaria, Datuk Mah Weng Kwai, Datuk Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari, Yeo Yang Poh, Ambiga Sreenevasan, Ragunath Kesavan, Christopher Leong and Steven Thiru.
"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," they said.
In less than a week, the Judiciary will bid farewell to one of its most distinguished judges.
The first woman Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, has reinvigorated the Judiciary by leading the third branch of government with integrity, intellect, courage, and dignity. She leaves on July 1, 2025.
"Two other Federal Court Judges who are retiring soon also deserve mention: Tan Sri Datuk Amar Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Tan Sri 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," said the past presidents.
Recently, Tengku Maimun said there has been no update regarding the possible extension of her tenure, as well as that of two other top judges.
"These three judges 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," they said.
The past presidents stressed that the concern is 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 powers that 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,".
They said these perceptions strike at the foundation of the judiciary and erode the its independence.
"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.
"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," they added. - June 25, 2025
.jpeg)
