ID :
36331
Thu, 12/18/2008 - 19:35
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://www.oananews.org//node/36331
The shortlink copeid
M'SIA'S PARLIAMENT PASSES JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION BILL
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 18 (Bernama) -- The Lower House of Parliament Wednesday passed the bill seeking to establish the Judicial Appointments Commission which will appoint judges of the superior courts as a measure to uphold the continued independence of the judiciary.
Twenty-four MPs spoke during the debate on the bill, which was passed by a
voice vote. The bill was tabled for first reading by Prime Minister Abdullah
Ahmad Badawi last Wednesday.
An issue which was debated at length touched on the validity of the bill
which was said to be contradictory to certain provisions of the Federal
Constitution.
However, when winding up the debate, Minister in the Prime Minister's
Department Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz said the bill was not
contradictory to articles 122B and 161E of the Federal Constitution.
"The process provided for in the bill is that which precedes the process of
appointment (of the judges) under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution by
the King on the advice of the prime minister after
consultations as required under Article 122B," he said.
According to Article 122B (1), all judges are appointed by the King on the
advice of the prime minister after consulting the Conference of Rulers.
According to Article 122B (2), before tendering his advice as to the
appointment of a judge other than the Chief Justice of the Federal Court, the
prime minister shall consult the Chief Justice.
According to Article 122B (3), the prime minister has to consult the Chief
Judge of Malaya and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak on the appointment of
the chief judge of Malaya and chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak, respectively.
According to Article 122B (4), the prime minister has to consult the
President of the Court of Appeal on the appointment of judges of the Court of
Appeal.
On the appointment of judges of the High Court, the prime minister has
to consult the Chief Judge of Malaya or the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak,
respectively, on the matter.
"At this stage, honourable MPs can gauge that there is nothing in the
provisions of the bill which touches directly or indirectly on the process of
appointments I spoke at length a while ago.
"This bill has been so formulated that it does not at all touch on the
process of appointment and prerogative powers provided for under Article 122B of
the Federal Constitution," he said.
As such, Mohamed Nazri said, the bill can stand on its own without the need
for an amendment to the Federal Constitution. Therefore, there was no necessity
to amend the constitution.
On the same principle, Mohamed Nazri said, the bill did not also
contradict
provisions in Article 161E of the Federal Constitution because Article 161E (2)
(b) touched on the constitution and jurisdiction of the High Court in Sabah and
Sarawak and the appointment, removal and suspension of judges of that court.
As such, he said, the consultative powers pertaining to the appointment of
judges vested in the chief ministers of Sabah and Sarawak under Article 161E (2)
(b) of the Federal Constitution were unaffected as there was no amendment to the
constitution.
On the apprehension of several MPs pertaining to the appointment of four
eminent persons to sit on the commission, Mohamed Nazri said the prime minister
would definitely consider any conflict of interests prior to appointing these
individuals.
"I am confident the prime minister will not appoint anyone assumed to have
conflict of interests so as not to undermine the objective to improve the
process of appointment of judges," he said.
A clause in the bill provides for the appointment of four eminent persons
to the commission, who are not members of the executive or public service, by
the prime minister after consultation with the Bar Council and other legal
bodies.
Dismissing claims that the bill did not propose any change to the process
of appointment of judges of the superior courts, Mohamed Nazri said there was a
difference because now nine individuals would be responsible for the selection
of the judges.
"How can there be no difference? Previously, the candidate was decided by
the prime minister on the advice of one person (the chief justice). Now, nine
people will advice the prime minister. Is this not better than before? So,
concur," he said.
On a proposal that the Attorney-General be made a member of the commission,
Mohamed Nazri said that would raise a conflict of interests. As such, the
attorney-general and several institutions were not considered, he added.
Twenty-four MPs spoke during the debate on the bill, which was passed by a
voice vote. The bill was tabled for first reading by Prime Minister Abdullah
Ahmad Badawi last Wednesday.
An issue which was debated at length touched on the validity of the bill
which was said to be contradictory to certain provisions of the Federal
Constitution.
However, when winding up the debate, Minister in the Prime Minister's
Department Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz said the bill was not
contradictory to articles 122B and 161E of the Federal Constitution.
"The process provided for in the bill is that which precedes the process of
appointment (of the judges) under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution by
the King on the advice of the prime minister after
consultations as required under Article 122B," he said.
According to Article 122B (1), all judges are appointed by the King on the
advice of the prime minister after consulting the Conference of Rulers.
According to Article 122B (2), before tendering his advice as to the
appointment of a judge other than the Chief Justice of the Federal Court, the
prime minister shall consult the Chief Justice.
According to Article 122B (3), the prime minister has to consult the Chief
Judge of Malaya and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak on the appointment of
the chief judge of Malaya and chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak, respectively.
According to Article 122B (4), the prime minister has to consult the
President of the Court of Appeal on the appointment of judges of the Court of
Appeal.
On the appointment of judges of the High Court, the prime minister has
to consult the Chief Judge of Malaya or the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak,
respectively, on the matter.
"At this stage, honourable MPs can gauge that there is nothing in the
provisions of the bill which touches directly or indirectly on the process of
appointments I spoke at length a while ago.
"This bill has been so formulated that it does not at all touch on the
process of appointment and prerogative powers provided for under Article 122B of
the Federal Constitution," he said.
As such, Mohamed Nazri said, the bill can stand on its own without the need
for an amendment to the Federal Constitution. Therefore, there was no necessity
to amend the constitution.
On the same principle, Mohamed Nazri said, the bill did not also
contradict
provisions in Article 161E of the Federal Constitution because Article 161E (2)
(b) touched on the constitution and jurisdiction of the High Court in Sabah and
Sarawak and the appointment, removal and suspension of judges of that court.
As such, he said, the consultative powers pertaining to the appointment of
judges vested in the chief ministers of Sabah and Sarawak under Article 161E (2)
(b) of the Federal Constitution were unaffected as there was no amendment to the
constitution.
On the apprehension of several MPs pertaining to the appointment of four
eminent persons to sit on the commission, Mohamed Nazri said the prime minister
would definitely consider any conflict of interests prior to appointing these
individuals.
"I am confident the prime minister will not appoint anyone assumed to have
conflict of interests so as not to undermine the objective to improve the
process of appointment of judges," he said.
A clause in the bill provides for the appointment of four eminent persons
to the commission, who are not members of the executive or public service, by
the prime minister after consultation with the Bar Council and other legal
bodies.
Dismissing claims that the bill did not propose any change to the process
of appointment of judges of the superior courts, Mohamed Nazri said there was a
difference because now nine individuals would be responsible for the selection
of the judges.
"How can there be no difference? Previously, the candidate was decided by
the prime minister on the advice of one person (the chief justice). Now, nine
people will advice the prime minister. Is this not better than before? So,
concur," he said.
On a proposal that the Attorney-General be made a member of the commission,
Mohamed Nazri said that would raise a conflict of interests. As such, the
attorney-general and several institutions were not considered, he added.
