|
|
MALAYSIA: Courts on Trial - Again
By Baradan Kuppuswamy
KUALA LUMPUR, Jun 8 (IPS) - The spotlight is once again on the Malaysian judiciary, which was previously accused of pandering to political masters.
Such charges have lessened after Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi took over in 2003 and advised judges to work without fear or favour, but new and more serious allegations have cropped up - that some justices could be on the take.
A front-page story in the semi-official 'New Straits Times' newspaper on Jun. 1 said it all: 'Justice for Sale. Are some judges corrupt'?
The article has sparked an unusually open debate about judicial corruption and how to restore accountability and respectability to the bench, such as implementing more transparent ways to select judges.
Judicial corruption has long been suspected based on the results of some high-profile judgments but the subject only surfaced publicly after Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz openly admitted on May 31 that he had received anonymous letters alleging some judges were on the take.
"I received complaint letters against the judges and I have handed (the letters) over to the authorities for investigation. I hope they get reliable evidence on them," Ahmad Fairuz told local reporters last week.
"Even if only a few judges are corrupt, the entire system would be affected," he said.
Lawyers, judges and civil society proponents welcomed the candid remarks saying they indicated willingness to confront and resolve a growing cancer within the judiciary.
"The authorities must investigate thoroughly," said a prominent lawyer who declined to be named because he appears before the bench often.
"Corruption has afflicted every level of our society and the judiciary is no exception. We have long suspected it but the evidence is hard to come by," the lawyer told IPS.
Other lawyers said it is common knowledge in the profession that not only were some judges corrupted but also that certain lawyers abetted the corruption.
Besides demanding a through probe, lawyers and retired judges also urged the authorities to make public the findings. The contents of the letter have not been made public.
They also want protection for whistle blowers and major changes in the way judges are selected.
Now judges are nominated solely by the chief justice and confirmed by the government with the consent of the King.
Previously the Bar Council was consulted but after lawyers criticised the selection during the tenure of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, the consultation suddenly ceased, lawyers said.
Historically judges enjoyed high esteem and were considered incorruptible. But that perception changed from 1988, the year Mahathir confronted judges over several decisions that went against his government.
In the fallout, six Supreme Court judges were impeached and three of those were sacked, including the top judge.
Men of lesser esteem filled the vacancies and the rot set in, a lawyer told IPS. "The current problems in the judiciary have their origins in the disastrous events of 1988."
During the boom years of the 1990s the bench came under fire for unsavoury dealings with business tycoons. The rot deepened during the trial of then deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim on charges of sodomy and corruption, universally criticised as "show trials".
In recent years a judge described the fall in the courts' reputation in a blunt retirement speech. He said he was "embarrassed" to be a judge and alleged that litigants were confident of winning "hopeless cases" so long as they were filed in "certain courts".
But the warnings fell on deaf ears, until now when the chief justice himself raised the subject.
One solution that judges, the Bar Council and a former attorney general are suggesting is the creation of a permanent and independent Judicial Commission to handle the selection of judges. The commission, they say, should be answerable to parliament.
"The process should be less subjective and far more consultative, transparent and accountable than the current practice," Bar Council President Yeoh Poh San said in a statement.
He said the commission would select, appoint and promote judges and oversee their conduct and the administration of justice in a holistic manner.
Former attorney general Abu Talib Othman urged the government to take the letters seriously because "experience shows that they often contain the truth".
"Is the judiciary serious about eradicating corruption? An anonymous letter does not necessarily mean that it is baseless. It can form the basis for an investigation," he said.
This is not the first time that the judiciary has been tarnished through anonymous letters. In the mid-1990s, a High Court judge sparked a major investigation after he sent out anonymous letters alleging impropriety by his colleagues.
But the writer was investigated and forced to leave the bench while the allegations were dropped, not investigated.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who is already under severe pressure from rights activists to implement his election pledges to institute democratic reforms, appears unconvinced of the need for reforms.
A Judicial Commission, Abdullah said, is no simple matter. "We will however study the matter," he added, confirming the anonymous letters were being investigated.
But the prime minister's critics speculate that like other "investigations", this one too will probably disappear under the carpet.
With a freer media under Abdullah, ordinary Malaysians are also making known their views on all matters of public life.
In a poll by 'The Star' newspaper on how to eliminate corruption in the judiciary nearly 65 percent said a three-member bench that would hear every case was a sure way to check corruption.
Another majority suggestion is to bring back jury trial, which was abolished a decade ago because of its cumbersome nature.
Nearly all respondents said it is urgent to have a law to protect whistle blowers.
But not all is lost with the Malaysian judiciary, which in recent years has shown signs of flexing its muscles. One case was the acquittal and freeing of opposition icon Anwar Ibrahim, who was imprisoned for six years after a trial that was widely condemned.
06081151 ORP006
NNNN
(END/2006)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is RSS?
