Pakatan MPs opposed the Bill – describing it as dangerous, giving present and future premiers huge power over judges ~ Malaysiakini

By Wong Choon Mei

The Judicial Appointments Commission Bill – which critics warn is
not just cosmetic but also dangerous as it legitimises existing
loopholes for corruption instead of plugging them off – was hammered
through Parliament after hours of intense debate by both government and
opposition MPs.

In a voice vote undertaken late in the evening, the ayes from the
ruling Barisan Nasional coalition out-rang the nays which came mainly
from the Pakatan Rakyat.

“The Bill is so weak, we didn’t support it at all,” said R Sivarasa, KeADILan vice president and MP for Subang.

“You need a constitutional amendment to do what this Bill is
supposed to do. As it is, it actually gives legal form to the huge
influence the executive, in particular the prime minister, has in the
appointment of judges. They are legitimising bad practise,” he added.

The JAC Bill is the legislation that regulates the appointment of
judges and the various committees involved in the process. The Barisan,
which holds the parliamentary majority, did not need the support of the
opposition to carry the Bill through.

Together with the MACC Bill passed last night, the two sets of
legislation have been hyped as reform bills that Prime Minister
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was determined to thunder through to ensure that
integrity prevailed over corruption when he surrenders his office to
his deputy, Najib Abdul Razak, in March next year.

But both sets of new law have fallen flat, incurring scorn and
widespread criticism from across the political divide, including the
Bar Council, civil and human rights groups.

BN lawmakers on the defensive

Despite the wave of negative feedback, Barisan lawmakers stoically defended their leader’s legacy to the nation.

Said Khairy Jamaluddin, MP for Rembau and also Abdullah’s
son-in-law: “The formation of the JAC is the right move to bring
confidence into the independence of Malaysia’s judiciary, in line with
international standards of judicial systems.”

“The bill should be supported because the Commission is a reflection
of the country’s respect of democratic society. It also ties the prime
minister to a duty to ensure that continuous freedom of the judiciary
is maintained and defended,” he said during the Bill’s debate.

Mohd Puad Zarkashi, the BN MP for Batu Pahat, said the appointment
of judges is the government’s job and is not tantamount to
interference. It becomes interference only if there were orders to
overturn a judge’s decision or instructions to him to be partial to
certain parties, he added.

“The question is whether there is a monitoring system to ensure that judges make impartial judgements,” Mohd Puad said.

Another BN lawmaker Wilfred Bumburing , the MP from Tuaran,
suggested that a clause be inserted to include participation of Sabah
and Sarawak in the appointments of judges.

“This is to ensure that capable judges from the two states have equal opportunity to be elevated to higher posts,” he added.

The other side

Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim hit bulls-eye when he voiced fears
the JAC might become nothing more than a vehicle of the prime minister
when it took effect next year.

“Yes, he must be influential but he should not be given the freedom
to appoint and retrench at his discretion,” the Permatang Pauh MP and
de-facto head of KeADILan said.

“All three opposition parties have given our assurance that if the
prime minister wants to amend the constitutional provisions to empower
the MACC or JAC, we will support,” he added.

DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) also voiced fears about the JAC’s independence.

“The existence of the JAC itself does not adhere to the requirements
of the Constitution, which means that at any time in the future, its
decisions can be challenged in court,” Lim said.

“There is also no attempt to return Article 121(1)(a) of the
Constitution to its original form in the Bill to ensure there’s
separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. We
shouldn’t forget the judicial crisis of 1988, which brought scandal to
Malaysia’s image,” he added.

Lim called for the Bill to be referred to a parliamentary select
committee first to allow Parliament to investigate the causes of the
loss of confidence in the judiciary.

Another Pakatan MP Khalid Abd Samad said the Bill would not solve the problem of executive interference in the judiciary.

“The Bill states that it is a pivotal requirement that the prime
minister must defend the independence of the judiciary. If the present
or future prime minister is tainted by scandal, that will affect his
capability to ensure the judiciary’s independence is maintained,” said
Khalid , who is the PAS MP for Shah Alam.

“I hope if the 1988 judicial crisis recurs, Barisan MPs will join us
in moving a motion of no-confidence against the Prime Minister because
he had failed to protect the judiciary’s independence,” he added.

DAP chairman Karpal Singh, the Bukit Gelugor MP, pointed out that
there was no guidelines in the JAC Bill on who could be appointed and
who should be promoted.

He also asked if there were guidelines on actions that could be taken against judges who committed offences outside of the Bill.

“Are there actions possible against a judge, for instance, who makes sexist remarks against women lawyers?” he asked.