Latest news with #JACAct2009
Focus Malaysia
2 days ago
- Politics
- Focus Malaysia
'Agong should delay swearing in of CJ, appellant court president till their appt legality confirmed'
LAWYER Charles Hector has called on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) to delay the July 28 swearing in ceremony of Chief Justice-appoint Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh and Court of Appeal president Datuk Abu Bakar Jais pending confirmation that their appointments are law abiding. Hector who is also a human rights activist further contended that the crux of the matter is that Prime Minister (PM) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim 'may have ignored the recommendations of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) to get his own choice of judges to be appointed'. 'If later, it is found that the appointments were illegal for failure to strictly comply with the law, then Wan Farid, Abu Bakar and even Datuk Azizah Nawawi who was appointed as Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak may be embarrassed unnecessarily,' he penned on his latest blog. 'It is best to be duly sure before proceeding with the appointment.' Since, the enactment of the JAC Act 2009, Hector stressed that the Parliament has decided that the sitting PM will have no absolute discretion with regard to appointment of judges. In other words, the PM is restricted from viewing the vetted names of candidates who have been approved and recommended by the JAC. This has to do with the earlier controversies sparked by the Lingam Tape Scandal 2007 which was coincidentally exposed by PMX himself in his then capacity as the de facto PKR president. In a nutshell, the scandal revealed that external parties could and may have influenced the appointment of judges or even the judges that heard certain cases. As solution to the issue, the JAC Act 2009 was tabled. 'The JAC will as soon as a vacancy is apparent start working to identify persons/judges whom they will recommend to the PM who will then advise the Agong to appoint,' stressed Hector who is also the co-founder of NGO Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET). 'As the JAC would reasonably act FAST so we don't end up with a vacancy (or a prolonged vacancy), was it PMX who delayed the appointment process after having received the JAC's recommendations? 'Did he fail to advice the Agong to appoint judges when vacancies arise?' On this note, Hector pointed to the following: The nine-month delay in appointing a new Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya; The delay that caused unfilled vacancies of judges in the High Court, Court of Appeal and the Federal Court (more than 29 + 2 vacancies); and The delay in the appointment of the Chief Justice and Court of Appeal president, both of whom had retired by July 2. 'Did PMX ignore the recommendation of the JAC which would reasonably have been made way before the CJ retired (given that there was 16-17 days delay before the appointment of Wan Farid and Abu Bakar),' queried Hector. 'Did PMX cause another JAC to sit thereafter to make new recommendations which may be a breach of the JAC Act 2009? 'Amid these many uncertainties, it's best that ALL these doubts be resolved before the Agong appoints the new Chief Justice or appellant court president.' – July 23, 2025 Main image credit: Media Perpaduan
Daily Express
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Express
Court to hear Bar's bid for JAC minutes in September
Published on: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 Published on: Wed, Jul 16, 2025 By: V Anbalagan, FMT Text Size: Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan Syed Ibrahim (left) with his lawyers Simrenjit Singh and Daniel Annamalai (right) outside the High Court after today's proceedings. Kuala Lumpur: The High Court has agreed to hear an application by the Malaysian Bar seeking the disclosure of the minutes of every meeting held by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) since January 2023. The application is tied to an ongoing suit brought by lawyer Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan Syed Ibrahim in which the Bar appears as an intervener. In his suit, Syed Amir is challenging the constitutionality of the JAC Act 2009. Advertisement At case management today, Justice Amarjeet Singh gave Syed Amir and the defendants – the government and the JAC – until July 30 to file their affidavits in reply. The judge also set Aug 30 as the deadline for all parties to tender their written submissions. The Bar's application, filed last week, contends that the JAC minutes must be sighted to resolve factual disputes raised in Syed Amir's amended originating summons. In an affidavit filed in support of the Bar's application, its secretary, Murshidah Mustafa, said the documents would assist the court in determining whether the case warrants referral to the Federal Court. Earlier, Syed Amir's counsel, Simrenjit Singh, urged Amarjeet to hear his client's reference application to the Federal Court first. 'The JAC members have an overreaching influence on the executive, which is not envisaged by the Federal Constitution,' said Simrenjit, who was assisted by Daniel Annamalai. That position was supported by senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly, appearing for the defendants. Counsel Christopher Leong, appearing for the Bar, however, called for the court to dispose of the discovery application first, pointing out that Syed Amir had in his affidavit alleged executive interference in the exercise by the JAC of its functions. 'Our application will become academic should the court allow the plaintiff's reference application,' said Leong, who appeared with B Anand Raj and Abdul Rashid Ismail. Lawyer Ramkarpal Singh, acting for Bersih – granted amicus curiae status in the proceedings – said the Bar's application should take precedence. 'The JAC Act is not unconstitutional and the plaintiff's 16 legal questions for reference are too general,' the MP and former deputy law minister said. Syed Amir filed his reference application on June 25. He is seeking a ruling as to whether the JAC Act 2009 contravenes the constitution, and whether judicial appointments made under the Act are rendered void as a result. His originating summons, filed in April, challenges the constitutionality of the JAC Act 2009, its alignment with the Federal Constitution, and the legitimacy of all judicial appointments made under its purview. He argues that the Act impinges on the supremacy of the constitution, as provided by Article 4, and that it is invalid as it violates Article 38(4), having been passed without the consent of the Conference of Rulers. Syed Amir further claims that the commission's powers breach the doctrine of separation of powers and the constitution's basic structure. He is seeking a mandamus order to compel strict adherence to Article 122B of the constitution, arguing that the prime minister has absolute discretion in advising the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on judicial appointments. The JAC is responsible for nominating judges to the superior courts and recommending candidates for top judicial roles, including chief justice and chief judges for Malaya and Sabah & Sarawak. Syed Amir contends that his legal questions are neither academic nor hypothetical, and that the outcome of the suit may affect all judicial appointments made since 2009. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
New Straits Times
16-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Malaysian Bar seeks court order for access to JAC meeting minutes
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Bar has filed a discovery application in the High Court seeking access to the Judicial Appointments Commission's (JAC) meeting minutes from the past two years. Christopher Leong who appeared for the Malaysian Bar said the application was made due to a dispute over facts in the ongoing proceedings. He said this when met after a court hearing today on an originating summons filed by a lawyer to challenge the constitutionality of the JAC Act 2009, naming the government and the JAC as respondents. "Judge Datuk Amarjeet Singh has fixed Sept 11 to hear the application," said the former Malaysian Bar president. On April 22, the same court allowed the Malaysian Bar to intervene, while the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) was allowed to hold a watching brief in the case. The lawsuit was filed on April 8 by Datuk Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan Syed Ibrahim, who is seeking a declaration that the JAC Act is unconstitutional, null, and void for contravening Article 122B of the Federal Constitution. He is also seeking a mandamus order to compel the prime minister and the government to comply with the judicial appointment process set out under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution and be free from any interference by the Commission. Article 122B provides that the appointment of judges shall be made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the prime minister after consulting the Conference of Rulers. In addition, he is seeking an interim stay of any judicial appointments made according to the JAC Act 2009 pending the disposal of the application and further orders deemed fair, just and appropriate in the interests of justice. Malaysian Bar secretary Murshidah Mustafa, in her supporting affidavit, claimed that Bar president Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab had requested the documents from the then JAC chairperson via a letter dated May 9. However, the request was rejected on June 5, with the JAC citing Section 32 of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act, which imposes a duty of secrecy on its members and prohibits disclosure of any information unless ordered by the court. She claimed the documents are relevant and necessary to demonstrate the actual working of the JAC in carrying out its statutory duties and powers under the JAC Act 2009. On April 10, Malaysian Bar president Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab in a statement said the challenge was raising important constitutional questions and reaffirmed the right of every citizen to seek judicial clarity on matters of public importance. He added that the Bar has long called for reforms to the JAC Act, particularly to reduce its judge-centric composition and promote greater diversity and inclusivity, while reviewing the executive's role in judicial appointments. He said the Bar Council's Civil Law and Law Reform Committee is currently finalising a comprehensive list of proposed amendments, which will be submitted to the government for consultation.
New Straits Times
15-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Former Bar president calls to amend JAC Act to give 'meaningful interpretation'
KUALA LUMPUR: The government should amend the Constitution to give the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) Act 2009 greater legal weight in the appointment of judges, says former Malaysian Bar Council president Salim Bashir. He said while the JAC Act 2009 had set out the procedural framework for judicial selections and recommendations, it should be given a "meaningful interpretation". "JAC Act 2009 is a federal law enacted under legislative power by virtue of Article 132(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution. "Though it sets out a procedural framework for selections of judges and recommendations, it should be given a meaningful interpretation that its existence is to complement the constitutional discretion bestowed under Article 122B(1) to the prime minister for recommendations and His Majesty for the appointment of judges. "Otherwise, it will certainly render the law redundant, repugnant to its objective and stamp absurdity to the working of rule of law and independence of judiciary," he said. Yesterday, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said that the JAC Act was not a binding provision in the appointment of judges. She said that such appointments were ultimately governed by Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, which empowered the prime minister to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers. She added that the JAC's role was to screen, assess and recommend names of judicial candidates, but its recommendations were not final or binding. Salim said if the government believes that the JAC Act did not provide any binding effect on the appointment of judges, then it should move to amend the Constitution. "Her (Azalina) statement has given impetus for legislative changes, and the government should consider amending the Constitution to give effect to the JAC Act on the appointment of judges. I am sure legislative members will render their support." Meanwhile, criminal lawyer Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent agreed with Azalina's constitutional interpretation, but cautioned against overlooking the JAC's intended role. "Yes, this is correct. Under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, the prime minister retains full authority to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on judicial appointments. The JAC can recommend, but not decide. "Despite lacking binding authority, the JAC serves important functions. It provides professional vetting of candidates, ensures some degree of transparency in appointments and maintains records of the selection process. "Even though its recommendations are not binding, the JAC acts as an important institutional check against arbitrary or political appointments." Geethan said the JAC's primary task was to review potential judges based on their experience, skills and professional conduct. "They interview candidates and then suggest names to the prime minister. Although the JAC thoroughly documents the selection process, it has no authority to compel the prime minister to accept its recommendations or to require any explanation if they are disregarded. "In essence, the JAC handles the groundwork but holds no real influence over whether its suggestions are acted upon." He added that while Azalina's remarks were technically accurate, they failed to address the broader issue of judicial independence. "While Azalina's remarks are technically accurate regarding the constitutional framework, they overlook the original intent behind creating the JAC to reduce political influence in judicial appointments. "Her statement reflects the current legal reality but fails to address whether this system adequately protects."
Malaysiakini
06-07-2025
- Politics
- Malaysiakini
Group questions urgent JAC meeting, PM's role in judge appointments
A group expressed alarm at Acting Chief Justice Hasnah Hashim calling for an urgent Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) meeting on Friday (July 4). The Defend the Judiciary Secretariat said this violated Section 13 of the JAC Act 2009, which requires a 10-day notice for the commission to meet. The secretariat...
