How does the Malaysian Bar view the constitutionality of judicial appointments?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Malaysian Bar Considers Recent Judicial Appointments Unconstitutional

The Malaysian Bar has asserted that the appointments of Tan Sri Raus Sharif as Chief Justice and Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin as President of the Court of Appeal are unconstitutional. This stance raises concerns about the potential impact on the judiciary's reputation and credibility, with warnings of a possible constitutional crisis.
Challenges to Extended Tenures

The Malaysian Bar's position directly challenges the extended tenure of Tan Sri Raus Sharif as Chief Justice, which goes beyond the standard retirement age of 66. This extension, coupled with the appointment of Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, has been met with significant opposition from various quarters, including legal bodies and political figures.
Concerns Over Judicial Credibility

A key concern articulated by the Malaysian Bar is that the continued presence of Raus and Zulkefli in their respective top judicial positions could undermine the public's trust in the Malaysian judiciary. The body has explicitly warned that these appointments may affect the reputation and credibility of the institution.
Potential for Constitutional Crisis

Beyond the immediate concerns about credibility, the Malaysian Bar has also cautioned that the ongoing situation surrounding these judicial appointments could potentially precipitate another constitutional crisis. This suggests a deeper apprehension about the adherence to constitutional principles in the selection and continuation of senior judicial officers.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

How does the Malaysian Bar view the constitutionality of judicial appointments?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends