Resolution on Upholding the Supremacy of the Federal Constitution and Defending the Independence and Integrity of the Judiciary
WHEREAS:
(1) The Office of the Prime Minister announced, in a media statement dated 7 July 2017 (see Appendix A), that:
“Pursuant to Article 122B(1) of the Federal Constitution, His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, on the advice of the Prime Minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers convened on the 24th and 25th of May 2017, is pleased to announce the following:-(i) YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif who has been appointed as an additional judge in the Federal Court for a period of 3 years commencing from 4th of August 2017 pursuant to Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution, to continue holding the position of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court from the date and for the same period; and(ii) YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin who was appointed as an additional judge for the Federal Court for a period of 2 years commencing from 28th of September 2017 pursuant to Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution, to continue holding the position of the President of the Court of Appeal from the date and for the same period.2. The appointment of YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif and YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin as additional judges in the Federal Court after each of them reaching the age of 66 years and 6 months is on the respectful suggestion and advice of the Chief Justice at the material time, YAA Tun Dato’ Seri Arifin bin Zakaria to His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the 30th of March 2017, before Yang Amat Arif retired. The proposal and advice was accepted by His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in accordance with Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution.3. The above decisions and procedure are consonant with the provisions of the Federal Constitution now.4. The Malaysian Government is however contemplating tabling a proposal in Parliament for the amendment of Article 125 of the Federal Constitution to raise the retirement age of Apex Court judges to 70 years. This is consonant with the Commonwealth and international practice and jurisprudence.”;
(2) The
Office of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court (“Chief Justice”) and
the Office of the President of the Court of Appeal are key positions in
the Judiciary, an institution that is independent under the doctrine of
separation of powers that underpins our constitutional framework;
(3) The
Chief Justice, as the Head of the Federal Court, and the President of
the Court of Appeal, as the Head of the Court of Appeal, are both
leaders of the Judicial branch of the Government, which is entrusted
with the supreme duty of determining the constitutionality of laws
passed by the Legislative branch, and the legality of decisions made by
the Executive branch;
(4) Pursuant to their solemn oaths of office and allegiance, the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal pledge to “bear true faith and allegiance to Malaysia, and will preserve, protect and defend its Constitution”;
(5) Article 125(1) of the Federal Constitution stipulates that “… a
judge of the Federal Court shall hold office until he attains the age
of sixty-six years or such later time, not being later than six months
after he attains that age, as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve”.
There is no provision in the Federal Constitution, and it is thus
unconstitutional, for a serving Chief Justice or a serving President of
the Court of Appeal to continue to hold the positions of Chief Justice
and President of the Court of Appeal, respectively, beyond the
prescribed age limit of 66 years and 6 months;
(6) Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution provides that “Notwithstanding
anything in this Constitution contained, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong
acting on the advice of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court may
appoint for such purposes or for such period of time as he may specify
any person who has held high judicial office in Malaysia to be an additional judge of the Federal Court.” (emphasis added). This provides an exception that is clearly limited to the appointment of an additional judge, and not for the appointment of a Chief Justice or a President of the Court of Appeal;
(7) It
is unconstitutional for YAA Tun Dato’ Seri Arifin bin Zakaria to have
advised, on 30 March 2017 (on the eve of his retirement), that YAA Tan
Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif (“current CJ”) and YAA Tan Sri Dato’
Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (“current PCA”) be appointed,
purportedly as additional judges under Article 122(1A) of the Federal
Constitution, when the latter two judges were still serving as judges;
(8) Nothing
in Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution permits an outgoing
Chief Justice to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in respect of any
appointment of additional judges that is to take effect after
he has ceased to be the Chief Justice. Otherwise, an outgoing Chief
Justice may, before his retirement, advise on the appointment of
additional judges that would take effect when he is no longer the Chief
Justice, and even long after;
(9) Furthermore,
nothing in Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution permits any
advice of an outgoing Chief Justice to be acted upon after his
retirement;
(10) Any
such advice given by an outgoing Chief Justice would also
unconstitutionally and unacceptably encroach upon and usurp the duties
and powers of the serving Chief Justice, as the provision in Article
122(1A) of the Federal Constitution should only be exercised, if at all,
by the serving Chief Justice, and on the basis of circumstances
existing during the time that he is occupying the Office of the Chief
Justice;
(11) Any
advice pursuant to Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution must
therefore only emanate from a serving Chief Justice; and be considered,
be acted upon, and be in respect of appointments that would take effect,
during such serving Chief Justice’s tenure;
(12) Article 122(1) of the Federal Constitution stipulates that “the
Federal Court shall consist of a president of the Court (to be styled
“the Chief Justice of the Federal Court”), of the President of the Court
of Appeal, of the Chief Judges of the High Courts and, until the Yang
di-Pertuan Agong by order otherwise provides, of eleven other judges and such additional judges as may be appointed pursuant to Clause (1A)”
(emphasis added), which unequivocally indicates that an additional
judge cannot also be the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of
Appeal;
(13) The
Malaysian Bar does not question the abilities, capabilities or
suitability of the current CJ and the current PCA. However, their
tenures do, and must, come to an end on 3 August 2017 and 27 September
2017, respectively, and they cannot continue to hold those respective
positions thereafter;
(14) The
unconstitutional appointments of the current CJ and the current PCA
purportedly as additional judges in the Federal Court, and to continue
to hold the positions of Chief Justice and President of the Court of
Appeal, respectively, beyond the age limit of 66 years and 6 months as
prescribed in the Federal Constitution, lend to the inference that there
is a dearth of appropriate candidates among the eminent current members
of the Federal Court, who are suitable and have the necessary abilities
and capabilities;
(15) Should
the current CJ and/or the current PCA continue to hold their respective
positions beyond the age limit of 66 years and 6 months as prescribed
in the Federal Constitution, any orders and/or judgments that may be
made by panels of which the current CJ and/or the current PCA become(s)
member(s) may be called into question as to their validity. Such orders
and/or judgments will thus be controversial and adversely affect public
confidence in the administration of justice, which would be inimical to
public interest;
(16) Should
the current CJ and/or the current PCA accept their respective
unconstitutional appointments, they will assume the risk of conducting
themselves in a manner not befitting of a judge, or risk bringing
disrepute to the office of a judge, contrary to Paragraphs 7(8) and 8(7)
of the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009[1] as prescribed under Article
125(3B) and Article 125(3C) of the Federal Constitution;
(17) The
Prime Minister, Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak (“Prime
Minister”), acted unconstitutionally in relying on an erroneous
interpretation of the Federal Constitution in advising the Yang
di-Pertuan Agong that the current CJ and the current PCA, who have been
appointed purportedly as additional judges in the Federal Court, can
continue to hold the positions of Chief Justice and President of the
Court of Appeal, respectively, beyond the age limit of 66 years and 6
months as prescribed in the Federal Constitution;
(18) Furthermore,
the Prime Minister should not have given such advice to the Yang
di-Pertuan Agong when the Prime Minister is in a conflict of interest
position, as he is a litigant in numerous proceedings pending in the
courts, both in his official and personal capacity;
(19) The
said unconstitutional appointments would result in a severe erosion of
public confidence in the institution of the Judiciary, and may invite an
adverse perception as to its independence and integrity; and
(20) The
vital nature of the roles and duties of the Chief Justice and the
President of the Court of Appeal under the Federal Constitution requires
the circumstances of their appointments to be beyond any constitutional
controversy.
THEREFORE, the Malaysian Bar hereby resolves:
(A) That
the appointment of YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif
purportedly as an additional judge, and to continue to hold the position
of Chief Justice beyond the age limit of 66 years and 6 months as
prescribed in the Federal Constitution, is unconstitutional, null and
void;
(B) That
the appointment of YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin
purportedly as an additional judge, and to continue to hold the position
of President of the Court of Appeal beyond the age limit of 66 years
and 6 months as prescribed in the Federal Constitution, is
unconstitutional, null and void;
(C) That
YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif and YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri
Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin be called upon to decline the aforesaid
unconstitutional appointments, and to retire as Chief Justice and as
President of the Court of Appeal on 3 August 2017 and 27 September 2017,
respectively;
(D) That
if the aforesaid unconstitutional appointments are not declined and/or
they do not retire, the Malaysian Bar will no longer have confidence in
YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif and YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri
Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin continuing to hold their respective offices
as Chief Justice and as President of the Court of Appeal beyond the age
limit of 66 years and 6 months as prescribed in the Federal
Constitution;
(E) That
if the aforesaid unconstitutional appointments are not declined and/or
they do not retire, YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif and YAA
Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin should not sit on the
bench of any court, or exercise any judicial or administrative powers
whatsoever attached to the respective offices of the Chief Justice and
the President of the Court of Appeal; including but not limited to the
power to empanel any court to hear any proceeding;
(F) That
so long as they remain in office as Chief Justice and President of the
Court of Appeal after they attain 66 years and 6 months, YAA Tan Sri
Dato’ Seri Md Raus bin Sharif and YAA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Zulkefli bin
Ahmad Makinudin shall not be invited to any social function of the
Malaysian Bar or Bar Council, and Members of the Bar are encouraged to
decline social invitations from them, or inviting them;
(G) That
in the event of any legal challenge in respect of the appointments,
since all serving judges are in a position of conflict, the Malaysian
Bar, pursuant to Article 131A of the Federal Constitution and Section 9
of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, calls upon the Chief Judge of the
High Court in Malaya to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, under Article
122(1A) of the Federal Constitution, to appoint persons who have held
high judicial office in Malaysia, who are not serving judges, as
additional judges for the purpose of empanelling a bench to hear and
determine the said legal challenge; and
(H) That
the Bar Council be mandated to take any and all steps that it deems
appropriate regarding the aforesaid unconstitutional appointments,
including instituting legal proceedings, for and on behalf of the
Malaysian Bar, to challenge the validity of the appointments, and to
seek interim as well as permanent reliefs, and to give effect to the
resolutions above.
[1] Paragraph 7(8) provides: A judge shall not conduct himself in a manner which is not befitting of a judge or which brings or is calculated to bring disrepute to his office as a judge.
Paragraph 8(7) provides: A judge shall not act in a manner which brings disrepute to his office as a judge.
The clarity of the age limit of Art. 125 cl. (1) of the Federal Constitution which undoubtedly must be applicable towards any appointments under Art. 122 cl. (1A) of the same, that limits the age of the judicial office holder at 66 years and 6 months, must assuredly render such appointments as unconstitutional, and thus, null and void, as strenuously highlighted in the unanimous Resolutions of the Malaysian Bar EGM.
ReplyDelete