<img loading="lazy" class="size-full wp-image-2548962 alignleft" src="https://media.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/cdecfc8b-hamid-sultan-abu-backer-columnist-new-310823-1.webp" alt="hamid backer" width="300" height="400" />
From the day former lord president Salleh Abbas was unceremoniously removed, a judicial curse befell our nation. It was not just a removal, it was a rupture in the constitutional soul of Malaysia.
Since then, the public has rightly questioned the integrity of three of the four constitutional pillars. One pillar &#8211; the judiciary, once the guardian of liberty &#8211; became a silent witness to its own erosion.
Let me say this without fear or favour: the cure for this judicial curse cannot be found in parades, slogans, or even a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) alone. It requires a complete dismantling of prosecutorial and judicial hegemony.
Without ethical reform across all institutions tied to the rule of law, any RCI will be a mere theatrical performance.
Magna Carta and a forgotten guarantee
In 1215, the King of England gave his subjects a sacred guarantee: trials of fact would be by peers, not by judges. That principle &#8211; born of the Magna Carta &#8211; is the antidote to judicial tyranny.
But in Malaysia, we have abandoned it. We have allowed judges to try facts, and in doing so, we have compromised justice.
I have proposed two models to restore integrity: the university cum court annexed arbitration, and the university cum court and jury mode <a href="https://adrarbitrationchambers.com/university-cum-court-and-jury-mode-criminal-trials/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criminal trials</a>.
These models are not mere academic exercises. They are prophetic blueprints to restore meritocracy, ethics, and public confidence. They remove the burden of fact-finding from judges and return it to the people, where it belongs.
Parades without purpose
It has become fashionable for politicians and legal actors to parade their concern for judicial integrity. But these parades are hollow. They do not propose cures. They do not honour whistleblowers. They do not demand tribunals after RCIs reveal misconduct. They are, in truth, constitutional distractions.
I speak from experience.
After filing a 64-page affidavit exposing judicial impropriety, I became a victim of my peers. An anonymous letter dated March 7, 2019, received by my secretary six days later, warned of my fate.
I was not shaken. I knew the Almighty had entrusted me with a prophetic task &#8211; to tame the unethical wilderness of the judiciary.
When the daughter of the late Karpal Singh pleaded with me to support her application in his sedition case, I did so without hesitation.
That affidavit triggered calls for an RCI. But the chief justices and heads of judiciary danced around it with public statements and overacts that were captured eloquently by a former attorney-general in his memoirs.
A jurisprudence of justice
I knew my days in the judiciary were numbered. My only desire was to complete the jurisprudence of the oath of office &#8211; a doctrine I developed through judgments unprecedented in judicial history.
I sought to enshrine three principles:
<ul>
<li>Legal presumptions are procedural &#8211; they cannot be the sole basis for conviction, especially in cases involving the death penalty.</li>
<li>Judicial power originates from the oath of office &#8211; the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Federal Constitution must be used to enhance social justice.</li>
<li>The courts must ensure humane imprisonment &#8211; adequate food, accommodation, and dignity are not optional.</li>
</ul>
In Aluma Mark Chinonso (2020), I saw an opportunity to state my jurisprudential position. My concurring judgment was an affirmation of social justice. It challenged prior rulings and exposed the fragility of our rule of law.
The reaction was swift. My peers convened an urgent meeting. They removed that judgment from the Federal Court website &#8211; and many others &#8211; without constitutional or statutory procedure. It was judicial hegemony at its worst.
Ethics for sale
Soon after, a respected jurist visited my chambers. He politely suggested that if I retired early, ethics proceedings would be dropped. I declined. My oath and religious mentoring forbade me from surrendering to intellectual dishonesty, moral corruption and judicial incompetence.
He was shocked. He left quietly. The rest of my days in the judiciary unfolded exactly as the anonymous letter foretold.
Pilot reform
If the government and the next chief justice adopt my methodology- clearing case backlogs through arbitration and reviving jury trials in amended form &#8211; the curse can be lifted. With support from senior practitioners and respected professors, we can restore judicial integrity within a year.
But that would require political will and institutional courage.
Malaysia cannot wait for another whistleblower to be sacrificed. We must act now, and with prophetic resolve, to restore the judiciary to its rightful place as the guardian of liberty.
&nbsp;
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.

MatchPoint Times

Cure for Malaysia’s generational judicial curse

If the government and incoming chief justice are serious about ending the judicial curse, they must go beyond slogans.

2 bekas pegawai PBT disyaki terima rasuah RM70,000 direman

Sergei Lavrov meets Xi Jinping in Beijing