REDEEMING THE HONOUR AND ESTEEM OF OUR JUDICIARY
Corruption and political interference have tarnished its image; culprits must be brought to book
JUSTICE is an integral part of human organisation and existence. It varies in its definition and practice from the primitive to the civilised societies but its primary objective is to safeguard individual and communal rights and dignity. What is deemed as justice in one culture is condemned as barbaric in others.
In the days of yore, especially in tribal communities, a council of elders settles disputes and metes out justice according to their cultural traditions and beliefs. Then in a more organised society justice was meted out by a single person, a chieftain, monarch, dictator or religious leader usually according to his absolute subjective inclination. For he was the judge, jury and executioner and guilt was established, not only according to traditional norms that favour these leaders, but mostly according to their whims and sentiments.
Since then the judicial system has become democratised based on the rule of law rather than ruled by the law of leaders. Yet in modern times, the judicial system varies according to the prevailing political structure and leadership of a country.
In a democratic country where the rule of law prevails, everyone in theory is equal under the law but some privileged segments are above the law by virtue of their position or associations. Thus, a judicial system is as good as the people who administer it within the context of a political framework.
In a political system that practices the separation of powers of the executive, legislative and judiciary, the judicial system works optimally when those involved in the administration of justice conduct themselves with rectitude, ethically and without fear or favour. However, the judicial system is compromised when legal officers become involved in partisan politics. True, they must serve the ruling government but they must strike a line between integrity and personal interest.
The quest for justice can be a long journey as our legal system allows for both the defendant and plaintiff to exhaust the full due process. What is troubling in the administration of justice is that the system seems to favour the well-heeled litigants who could afford the best lawyers and post any amount of bail, which could sometime run into the millions to avoid incarceration. While the poor ones who could not afford bail are incarcerated until the case is disposed. Without a good lawyer the chances are that a litigant may lose the case and be fined or imprisoned or both.
Thus, justice could be elusive especially to the bottom half of the society who do not have the means or knowledge to defend themselves when involved in civil or criminal disputes.
Sometimes, the wheel of justice turns slow for some, and fast for others. For example, the case of a common thief who stole a paltry sum of cash or goods is summarily disposed. On the other hand, the case of a politician who squandered a princely sum of the nation’s wealth usually crawls at a snail’s pace through the catacombs of legal meanderings. Even when a person is caught with his hands in the cookie jar, he could still wrangle his way out through the services of one or a team of experienced lawyers.
Lawyers play a crucial role in the legal system. It is imperative that the authorities get to the bottom of any judicial fiasco and bring to justice those who have tarnished the image of the judiciary and recover the honour and esteem of our judicial system.
What is troubling in the administration of justice is that the system seems to favour the wellheeled litigants who could afford the best lawyers and post any amount of bail, which could sometime run into the millions to avoid incarceration.
The writer is an emeritus professor at the Centre for Policy Research and International Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang