Bar: Promote based on seniority

‘Bypassing senior judges is a disservice to the judiciary’

PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Bar says seniority should be the main criterion for the elevation of judges after some members of the judiciary were passed over for promotion.

“While we do not question the abilities, capabilities or suitability of the judges who were elevated, we are concerned over the omission of more senior judges which may invite an adverse perception of the judiciary as a whole,” said its vice-president Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor.

Bypassing more senior judges, he said, was a significant disservice to the judiciary, with the uncertainty possibly affecting the morale of judicial officers who made a commitment to a career on the bench.

The Malaysian Bar has consistently called for the appointment and promotion of judges to be reformed, with a clearly defined criteria for the selection process, meaningful consultation with relevant stakeholders, and transparency and accountability by those involved in the appointment processes.

In a statement yesterday, Fareed congratulated the nine judges elevated on Nov 26.

But he also pointed out that several Court of Appeal and High Court judges who ranked higher in terms of seniority were bypassed for promotion.

In the ceremony held in the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, four judges – all former Court of Appeal judges – were elevated to the Federal Court.

They were Justices Datuk Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Datuk Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim, Tan Sri Idrus Harun and Datuk P. Nallini.

Five judges were also elevated to the Court of Appeal in the same ceremony – Justices Datuk Lau Bee Lan, Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah, Datuk Yew Jen Kie, Datuk Nor Bee Ariffin and Datuk Has Zanah Mehat.

They were all formerly from the High Court.

On Monday, Chief Justice Tan Sri Richard Malanjum said those chosen were thoroughly vetted by the Judicial Appointments Commission based on factors including their judicial temperament and quality of their judgments.

“These elevations are not done lightly and the judges chosen were selected on merit,” he said.

The Bar’s statement has drawn dissenting views from lawyers who say length of service was not necessarily the most significant indicator of a judge’s merit.

Criminal and commercial lawyer Alex Anton Netto pointed out it was an Asian custom to put age and seniority ahead of the value a person can bring to their post.

“To place all emphasis on seniority for elevation is flawed.

“I think a judge’s judicial creativity and activism, his boldness to take a stand even if it’s a dissenting one, should matter,” he said.