The Malaysian judiciary's integrity and independence is once again at risk of being tarnished but this time around it may be a case of good intention but bad implementation.

Early this week, more than 40 senior and lower court judges and court registrars attended a two-day seminar at a prominent hotel in Kuala Lumpur organised by Affin Merchant Bank Bhd.

Themed 'A Practitioner's Perspective and Legal Considerations of Merchant Banking Activities', the entire session was held behind closed-doors except for the opening ceremony.

The seminar, however, has raised concern among several members of the Malaysian Bar, who are worried that such association between the judiciary and any private sector entity may give the wrong impression to the public.

In his keynote address during the opening of the seminar, Chief Justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah expressed hope that "these sporadic trainings will eventually culminate in an organised and structured judicial education programme".

In conclusion, he hoped that the seminar will open the minds of the judges to the vagaries of the capital market.

"It cannot be overemphasised that continuing legal training is imperative, since judicial decision-making should be regarded not as a matter of either intuition or an adherence to rules but as a matter of process.

"The 'soundness' of a decision rests not so much in the result, as in the process by which the result was reached," said the chief justice.

It was estimated that the seminar would have cost more than RM4,000 with two coffee-breaks and a lunch for 50 people.

Among the issues addressed were private debt securities, mergers and acquisitions, management buy-outs and restructuring of companies

But attempts to get further details on the seminar, including whether judges were charged a fee, proved futile as the chief registrar of the Federal Court's office was tight-lipped when contacted today.

Appropriate bodies

Meanwhile, former Malaysian Bar president RR Chelvarajah today commended the chief justice for taking such positive steps but at the same time questioned the involvement of the private sector.

"At a time where matters are increasingly commercialised and technical, it was a good move by the judiciary.

"But the private sector's involvement in conducting the seminar is not really conducive because what if a matter involving any of the organisers or sponsors come before the judges?" he told malaysiakini .

Chelvarajah said in order to appear more positive such seminars should be organised by appropriate bodies like the National Institute of Public Administration Malaysia (Intan) or the Judicial and Legal Training Institute (Ilkap).

In the US, he said there were two bodies the federal-level National Judicial College in Reno, Nevada, and the National Center for State Courts in Williamsburg, Virginia that conduct highly-technical seminars.

"These seminars are highly-acclaimed and a regular feature in the US, where experts in the respective fields talk about the latest development in the banking and commerce, insurance and IT industries as part of the continuous training for the judiciary."

Excellent idea

Echoing a similar view was lawyer Charles Hector Fernandez who said there would be a certain negative public perception if judges were trained in a seminar organised by a private merchant bank.

"The judiciary must not only be independent but must also be seen to be independent. In fact, a big portion of cases in Malaysian courts involve banks and what banks perceive as proper procedures may not be just in law," he added.

Another lawyer described the idea for such training as "excellent" but cautioned the judiciary to be careful on how they were carried out, especially when the private sector was involved.

Stressing that participants usually pay for such seminars, the lawyer said it also gave the impression of a 'goodwill' between the judiciary and the private sector when the bank may one day be a party before them.

"I'm sure the intention was good but it should be done in a more appropriate manner. Furthermore, seminars like this one should be avoided because it will tarnish the judiciary's image and integrity in the long run," said the lawyer who declined to be named.