The issue of two High Court judges leaving the judiciary prematurely in September held court in the Dewan Rakyat today.

In one corner, senior parliamentarian Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) queried if there were other ‘real' reasons for the sudden resignation of the two judges, which was sternly rebutted by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz (BN-Padang Rengas).

"Could you be honest and clear with us? In these two cases, were they forced to resign because they did not provide their judicial reasons in several cases and the chief justice asked them to retire (early)? Is this true?" asked Karpal, who is a veteran lawyer as well.

However Nazri remained unperturbed by the constant questioning and stressed that the two senior judges had tendered their resignations "voluntarily". He also dismissed allegations that they were threatened or forced to resign.

"There are no judges in this world who would want to be treated as such. They resigned on their own will.

"We could not say that they were forced (to resign). They are not children. If they were willing to resign, what could the chief justice do?" he asked.

"We hear a lot of stories but the fact remains that they resigned willingly," he added.

Last September, it was reported that two judges - who had remained unnamed - had resigned in what was believed to be as a result of Chief Justice Zaki Azmi's new judiciary standards.

Zaki, who has been monitoring their performance since he became the head of the judiciary last year, had confirmed that the two judges left the judiciary "on their accord".

Without divulging any details on the two, Zaki had merely said they were "grossly inefficient".

The bill is about ethics, not offences

The debate between Karpal and Nazri took place during the tabling of the Judges' Ethics Committee Bill which would set guidelines of proper conduct for judges to carry out their duties in an efficient and expedient manner.

If the bill is passed, any complaint against a judge would be referred to the chief justice and can be heard by a Judges' Ethics Committee if it does not warrant a referral to the tribunal.

The bill proposes that the Judges' Ethics Committee Act 2008 be put in place to manage cases where judges are found to have broken the code of ethics.

However, Karpal remained unconvinced, arguing that there was no need to pass this bill as Article 125 of the Federal Constitution on the appointment of federal court judges has clearly set out the code of the ethics for the judges.

"For example, what happens if we want to put a judge on trial because he has committed an offence? In this case, such a bill would not make sense.

Nazri, however rebutted, saying that the code was only in operation against breaches of ethics by the judges.

He then cited the example of former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin's holiday trip with lawyer VK Lingam.

"But this (going on a trip), it is not an offence. It would be, however, against the ethics if a judge goes on a trip with a lawyer. However, if the judge commits an offence which is against the law, then he could be punished before the law," explained Nazri.