PUTRAJAYA – Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat has emphasised that any attempt to externally influence the judiciary or undermine public confidence in the authority is an aberration to the rule of law.
She said that more often than not, the courts and judges were often perceived as “unjustifiably” evil, when in truth they were both powerful and powerless at the same time.
This, she said, was because the public was often “swayed” by some external influence such as comments thrown towards the judiciary, especially on judgments passed on cases.
While judges do not answer to public opinion, popularity or sentiment, and are free from any political body, Tengku Maimun said that judges were often at the receiving end of attacks by some sectors of the public.
“In my view, public confidence in the judiciary is the measure and tool by which judges remain transparent and accountable to the public. It also means that the judiciary is mindful of the fact that it is the ultimate servant of the federal constitution for the benefit of the public.
“Contrary to common belief, judges truly do not carry much in the form of direct power. When a message is sent that a judicial decision is worth even less than the paper it is printed on, it gives the state’s subjects a reason to denounce the validity of judicial decisions.
“In such a situation, the rule of law, public order and the respect for authority all enter into a state of chaos. It is therefore worth remembering that any attempt to externally influence the judiciary or undermine public confidence in the judiciary is an aberration to the rule of law.
“(Moreover) comments and criticism (made on court judgments) must be based on some fact and not on lies or ignorance. In the best case, uneducated comments reflect sheer ignorance and in the worst case, they reflect malice,” she said in her speech delivered at the Opening of Legal Year 2024 ceremony at the Putrajaya International Convention Centre, here.
Also in attendance during today’s ceremony were Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdul and Attorney-General Datuk Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh.
Tengku Maimun also emphasised that when it came to questions of law, particularly pertaining to those touching on Islamic law and state laws, it was up to the courts to draw the line of distinction between both sets of laws.
She was referring to comments made by certain irresponsible parties that were aimed at painting the judiciary as having an “agenda” or motives to eradicate Islam in the country or an agenda to remove the Islamic legal system in Malaysia.
“Apart from manipulating these cases for their own gain, what these parties fail to mention is that by clearly interpreting the federal constitution and defining the powers of Parliament and the state legislatures, the Federal Court ensures the continuous and steady application of Islamic law because it guarantees that even Parliament cannot erode it.”
She further said that comments often thrown at cases involving questions of law where Islamic law and state enactments clashed unjustifiably questioned the personal faith of certain judges or even their motivation for deciding as such.
“In other respects, some comments incite hatred and ill will among the public against the judiciary or the fear of a perceived distorted outcome of such decisions. However, in certain other aspects, large crowds are mobilised and their presence is used to intimidate the judges.” – January 15, 2024