/file/1135/30c961e05fc29709b18782056797e404.jpeg)
COMMENT | Judges are appointed by law, not lobby
COMMENT | The appointment of judges to Malaysia’s superior courts is neither a subject for partisan debate nor should it be shaped by public sentiment or political interpretation.
It is a constitutional duty, carried out through a deliberate and structured process rooted in the Federal Constitution.
The recent appointment of Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh as the chief justice of Malaysia, along with other senior judicial positions, has drawn public attention.
While differing views are expected in a democracy, such appointments must be examined through the lens of law, not political bias or speculation.
Article 122B of the Federal Constitution provides the legal framework for the appointment of judges to the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal, and the High Courts.
It states that such appointments shall be made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the prime minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
COMMENT | The appointment of judges to Malaysia’s superior courts is neither a subject for partisan debate nor should it be shaped by public sentiment or political interpretation.
It is a constitutional duty, carried out through a deliberate and structured process rooted in the Federal Constitution.
The recent appointment of Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh as the chief justice of Malaysia, along with other senior judicial positions, has drawn public attention.
While differing views are expected in a democracy, such appointments must be examined through the lens of law, not political bias or speculation.
Article 122B of the Federal Constitution provides the legal framework for the appointment of judges to the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal, and the High Courts.
It states that such appointments shall be made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the prime minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
Ability matters more than personal history
In the case of Wan Ahmad Farid, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim acted in full accordance with this constitutional obligation, which included consultation with the outgoing chief justice, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, as required under Article 122B(2).
The recommendation was then presented to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers.
These appointments were not only constitutional in form but institutional in substance, reflecting the checks and balances intended by the framers of the Constitution.
Concerns have been raised about the backgrounds or perceived affiliations of certain appointees.
However, prior involvement in political or administrative service does not, by itself, disqualify an individual from judicial office. What matters is the individual’s conduct on the bench, their integrity, professionalism, and ability to uphold the law impartially.
Judges are not appointed based on personal histories, but on their capacity to serve justice without fear or favour from the moment they take their oath.
The purpose of constitutional monarchy
Malaysia’s model of constitutional monarchy exists in part to ensure that key state functions, including judicial appointments, are insulated from immediate political pressure.
The involvement of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers is central to this balance. It reinforces the principle that such appointments serve the national interest, not the interest of any one party or administration.
Our constitutional history also shows that the Conference of Rulers does not function merely as a rubber stamp. There have been cases where nominations were returned or reconsidered.
This reflects the active and thoughtful role the rulers play in protecting the integrity of national institutions.
Judges must now be free to operate
To question the legitimacy of these appointments, when they are made through constitutional procedure, is to question the very mechanism that guards judicial independence.
It risks eroding public confidence in one of the most vital arms of governance.
Once the process has been carried out in accordance with the Constitution, the discussion must return to principles, not personalities.
Judges will ultimately be assessed through the quality of their decisions, which is how any functioning democracy should evaluate its judiciary.
But before the courts are judged by outcomes, they must first be allowed to operate free from suspicion and political noise.
The right to scrutinise judicial rulings is an essential part of democracy, but that right must be grounded in an understanding of how our judicial system is constituted.
As these appointments take effect, we extend our full confidence and well wishes to the newly appointed leaders of the judiciary:
Wan Ahmad Farid, chief justice of Malaysia
Abu Bakar Jais, president of the Court of Appeal
Azizah Nawawi, chief judge of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak
May they uphold the rule of law with clarity, integrity, and unwavering commitment to justice for all Malaysians.
MAHATHIR MOHD RAIS is a former Federal Territories Bersatu and Perikatan Nasional secretary.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/06/1cb42b074a931d524a46b4bb2d4864a7.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/01/86a3e9b51f738dd4d3c47e747ad81fcf.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/02/95c23f2d398ef2f25246aba62d232278.png)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/08/68955bb7a8ba229fc32599bdd995a26c.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/07/adcbcf6b7acf77091aa7859e15495b93.jpg)
The appointment of Tun Zaki Azmi as Chief Justice in 2008 under Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi marked a controversial moment in Malaysia’s judicial history. Zaki, a former UMNO legal adviser and party insider, was elevated rapidly through the judicial ranks — from the Federal Court to Chief Justice within months — raising serious concerns about political interference and the erosion of judicial independence. Fast forward to 2025, and the appointment of Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh as Chief Justice by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim invites similar scrutiny. Though he retired from politics in 2013, Wan Ahmad Farid previously served as Deputy Home Minister under UMNO, and his political background continues to raise concerns about the perception of impartiality in Malaysia’s top judicial appointments. One of the most high-profile cases associated with Wan Ahmad Farid is the controversial "Low Conversion Case", where he, as a High Court judge, ruled in favour of a unilateral conversion of a child to Islam without the consent of the non-Muslim parent. His decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal, and the Federal Court later upheld the reversal, affirming the principle that both parents must consent to the conversion of a child. This outcome underscores the importance of constitutional safeguards and checks within the judicial system — but it also spotlights the enduring impact of a judge’s decisions, especially when that judge is later elevated to the nation’s highest judicial office. Ultimately, both appointments — Zaki in 2008 and Wan Ahmad Farid in 2025 — illustrate the risks of appointing former politicians to judicial leadership, particularly when past rulings or affiliations raise questions about bias or political loyalty. For the public to maintain trust, the judiciary must not only be independent — it must also be seen to be independent.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.