Judiciary

Ahmad Fairuz’ unproductive record as CJ in writing judgments

By Kit

October 22, 2007

Both the Lingam Tape and Fairuz Tape scandals were featured in today’s parliamentary proceeding.

On Barisan Nasional MP for Gerik, Datuk Dr. Wan Hashim bin Wan The’s query during Question Time on the “overlapping of jurisdiction between the Syariah Court and the Civil Court”, I put in a supplementary question on the Fairuz Tape (tape recording of a media interview by the Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim in August advocating the abolition of the Common Law).

I pointed out that the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had denied on behalf of Ahmad Fairuz in Parliament last month that the Chief Justice had made such a proposal, and the Fairuz Tape was proof that Najib had been made use of by the Chief Justice to mislead Parliament on the issue.

I said that if Ahmad Fairuz could lead Nazri to mislead Parliament in what he had actually said as proven by the Fairuz Tape, the Chief Justice could again mislead Nazri in his second denial that he was the other person at the end of the telephone conversion in the Lingam Tape scandal on the perversion of the course of justice.

In his reply, Nazri gave a new spin to Ahmad Fairuz’ media conference. Nazri did not deny the Fairuz Tape transcript but played down its significance claiming that the Chief Justice was pressed by reporters to offer his opinion that there was “no need” for the country to continue with the Common Law!

When I gave a copy of the Fairuz Tape to Nazri outside the Chamber, I stressed that the Chief Justice had sworn to uphold the constitution and he had been unfaithful to his oath of office when he proposed abandonment of a fundamental constitutional principle which was part of the Merdeka social contract, which was one of the charges of judicial misconduct preferred against former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas to justify the establishment of a Judicial Tribunal and his subsequent sacking from the highest judicial post of the land in 1988.

During the continuation of the debate on the 2008 Budget later in the morning, DAP National Chairman and MP for Bukti Glubor, Karpal Singh spoke, focusing on the Lingam Tape and the Chief Justice.

During Karpal’s speech, I intervened three times to make the following points:

1. That the country is facing a new constitutional crisis – with Ahmad Fairuz applying for a six-month extension as Chief Justice from Nov. 1 next month which faces strong opposition not only from the Malaysian Bar representing Malaysian lawyers but also various sectors of the Malaysian society, including the Conference of Rulers.

2. I referred to the Malaysian Bar website listing the reported judgments written by Ahmad Fairuz as compared to his three predecessors, Tun Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan Shah and Tun Mohamad Suffian which placed the current Chief Justice in very poor light for being the most “unproductive” of the four.

The comparative figures for Ahmad Fairuz, Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan and Mohd Suffian for written judgments are as follows:

*Table courtesy of Bar Council.

3. The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi should be mindful of the strong and valid objections to the extension of Ahmad Fairuz’s tenure as Chief Justice from Nov. 1, especially with the latest Lingam Tape scandal that Ahmad Fairuz was the person at the end of the telephone conversation on the perversion of the course of justice, and should not court a new constitutional crisis over the extension of Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Justice.

4. Although it is a month since the Lingam Tape was made public by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Ahmad Fairuz, senior lawyer V.K. Lingam and Cabinet Minister Tengku Adnan, the trio implicated in the Lingam Tape allegations concerning the perversion of the course of justice have not only failed to issue any direct denial but also have not lodged any police report despite the fact that the allegations are serious crimes of sedition if untrue.

5. That the threat by the Anti-Corruption Agency to charge and prosecute Anwar Ibrahim, R. Sivarasa and Sim Tze Tze if they fail to reveal the source and produce the entire Lingam Tape appeared to be part of a “cover-up” of the Lingam Tape scandal instead of a full investigation into the perversion of the course of justice which had brought public confidence in the independence and integrity of the judiciary to a new low.

6. That in keeping with the principle of judicial accountability, a full report should be presented in Parliament on the judges who have arrears of long-standing grounds of decision which had not been delivered — in view of the recent expose of a Federal Court judge who had over 30 outstanding grounds of decisions from his High Court tenure which had not been delivered.