In any society there are ideals to inspire and there are realities, and in between, the gap.

The ideal of Chief Justice? He must, first and foremost, be a good judge ie learned in the law and with intellectual ability to resolve complex problems; in temperament, measured and patient to hear all sides and in character, integrity and independence bowing to no pressure except the imperatives of justice and truth; someone who is not obsequious to the powerful and arrogant towards the humble; who is prepared to set aside personal ambition and greed for higher public duty; someone who, in personal life, is in accord with the standards of the community, a model citizen, normally a good family man – not a deviant or scandalous. He must also be a good administrator to run the court system. Also public relations skills of how to promote the justice system to the general populace as consumers and how to harmonise and work cooperatively with the government, NGOs including the Bar and other associations without compromising the independence of the administration of justice.

The fact is that there is no one person on earth, a paragon of men, that can have all these qualities all rolled into one. One can be brilliant but he cannot restrain his testosterones and is embroiled in sexual escapades; another may have all the social restraint but is either not diligent or not brilliant to write judgments and so on and so on.

Whatever the realities, the perception of the nearest to ideal representing the aspiration – the public face – must be there. We can’t have at the outset a CJ who is perceived corrupt or beholden to Power. Or somebody whose libido is so unrestrained that he gets his female employees to sit on his lap or engage in trickery of marrying women and destroying the marriage certificates thereafter.

But to be honest there’s no perfect man. We also know that perception of the ideal, even if possible, is not reality. So the trick is not just the person or the person of the CJ but the court system comprising a diversity of judges picked from various interests. This is where the importance of vesting judicial appointments with a Judicial Commission (“JC”) lies.

First of all, the JC must be constituted of members of impeccable credentials drawn from different sectors of society distinguished for their present and past contributions to the society and country.

The JC then canvasses candidates with legal qualifications and practice experience from various quarters : the government, the AG Chambers, the Judiciary and Judicial Services, the Bar Association, past and ex judges, the Academia/Universities, the Business Community whether represented by the Federation of Manufacturers or SMIs.

JC members then shortlist all candidates and recommend them to the PM and Yang di-Pertuan Agong to select amongst those recommended the CJ with the rest as judges.

As much as we need by way of check and balance a separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches, so within the specific context of the Judiciary alone, we would require judges recommended from a diversity of quarters to check one another in their execution of their judicial duties.

Under present system the recommendation comes principally from the CJ though PM has theoretically final say. If we have a crooked CJ he will seek to pack the court system with his own kind; or if we have a PM who wants to make the judiciary subservient to his power he will ensure only the obsequious and subservient are appointed.

Those who advocate the JC are people who are realistic to know that humanity is not perfect and that the best safeguard for an important institution like judiciary against normal human greed ambition and foibles is to pack the court system with eligible people of different perspectives and diversity of ideological background to check and balance one another.

Those who advocate JC are realistic to maintain a healthy skepticism of human nature or the perfectibility of man and that is why they rely on institutions of check and balance to neutralize Man’s imperfection.