Judges outburst could malign judiciary: UN official

comments     Published     Updated

Part of the dissatisfaction aired by Penang High Court judge RK Nathan against Court of Appeal judge Gopal Sri Ram could pose a threat to the judiciary, said United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers Param Cumaraswamy.

"Virtually all what he had said in the five pages regarding Justice Gopal were personal to him in substance," he said in a press statement today.

"The last sentence in that judgment, namely, 'He must know that each time he makes a personal attack upon a judge in future, a response will come swift and fast', could be perceived as a threat."

Param said that Nathan's widely reported outburst and that this was incorporated in a judgment of an unrelated personal injury case had raised concern regarding the integrity, propriety and decorum of judges.

He added that history had shown that judicial independence can be threatened not just by the government but also by other extraneous forces such as judges who are within the system itself.

Breach of ethics

Param also questioned whether it was proper for Nathan to used his judicial office to vent his personal anger in an unrelated judicial process.

"In that event, had he not allowed his private interests to come into conflict with his judicial duties or had he not used his judicial position for his personal advantage?" he said.

He also pointed out that Rule 3(1)(c) of the Judges Code of Ethics provides a judge shall not conduct himself in any manner likely to cause a reasonable suspicion, while Article 125(3) of the Federal Constitution provides for removal of judges for any breach of the code.

He said although judges are provided with insulations to enable them to exercise their judicial power independently and impartially, it cannot be misused.

"However, judges too are accountable. If they misused their judicial power they will lose these insulations and expose themselves to disciplinary proceedings," he said.

Personal vilification

On Thursday, in part of a written judgment, Nathan accused Gopal of making personal attacks against High Court judges and targeting him (Nathan) for personal vilification in open court.

While he agreed that Gopal as an appellate judge had every right to criticise his judgments, Nathan said he would not accept the latter's personal attacks against him.

"Against the latest judgment of mine in which he sat to hear the appeal, he accused me of being vindictive and (passing) judgment to satisfy my ego," said Nathan in a written judgment which was read in open court on Wednesday.

He was referring in particular to Gopal's comments in a Court of Appeal hearing on July 25 when, while setting aside Nathan's conviction of a lawyer for contempt, Gopal had said that judges should not launch contempt proceedings vindictively and "purely for personal ego".

It is said that Gopal made the remark "off the cuff" when he and two other Court of Appeal judges Abdul Kadir Sulaiman and Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, set aside a RM10,000 fine imposed on lawyer Lee Chan Leong for allegedly committing contempt before Nathan in April 1999.

Chief Justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah told reporters that he will make a statement next Tuesday on the matter after studying the judgments by Nathan and Gopal.



Malaysiakini
news and views that matter


Sign In