updated version

Chief Justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah today reminded judges not to make unwarranted personal remarks against their peers in order to safeguard the dignity and respectability of the judiciary.

Dzaiddin (photo) was referring to the controversy sparked off by High Court judge RK Nathan who incorporated his criticism against Court of Appeal judge Gopal Sri Ram in a written judgment for a totally unrelated case.

The chief justice said he viewed the matter, which has evoked a heated debate in both the legal fraternity and public domain, with grave concern.

"As a matter of principle, judges at all levels, whether at first instance or appellate, have no claim greater than the other, to make unwarranted remarks of a personal nature at the presiding judge, save that for intellectual disagreement," said Dzaiddin in his speech during the swearing-in ceremony of seven new Court of Appeal judges in Kuala Lumpur.

He added that nothing negates judicial dignity more directly and visibly than a judge's public dispute which sullies the respectability of the judiciary.

He said even if a judge had made an uncalled remark against another, it does not warrant a reaction of a similar nature because such response will only undermine the dignity and decorum expected of a judge.

"As judges, circumspection in all things should be in our watchword, even in the face of adversity. I expect all judges to exercise nothing but good sense and courtesy and display nothing but refinement and decorum in our conduct on or off the Bench," he said.

"By engaging in this very public display, these judges have severely wounded the very office which is regarded as sacrosanct," he said, stressing that the court is not an avenue for judges to unleash their personal differences.

Keep vigil

Dzaiddin said to use a court case to belittle the ability of another judge is inappropriate and must be stopped immediately because it will damage the judiciary's reputation and integrity in the public's eyes.

It is very important for judges to "keep vigil" and act responsibly and with courtesy at all times as "judicial reticence is a small price we pay for judicial independence", he said.

Last Wednesday, Nathan (photo) in a 17-page judgment for a personal injury civil suit, claimed that Gopal not only made personal attacks against him but also targetted him (Nathan) for personal vilification in open court.

Although Gopal as an appellate judge had every right to criticise his judgment, 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 the judgment which was read in open court.

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

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

Don't interfere

Meanwhile, referring to the Bar Council's call for a tribunal to resolve the dispute, Dzaiddin said the council should not interfere in order to maintain the cordial relationship between the Bar and the Bench.

He said the main concern was preserving the integrity of the judicial system which can only be done after a thorough appraisal of the situation.

Until then, he added, the Bar should refrain from treading in matters which is in the prerogative of the chief justice.

"The Bar would do well to allow this lapse in judicial conduct by the two judges to be dealt with by the judiciary. There is much to be said for maintaining our good relationship and we should avoid being at odds with one another," said Dzaiddin, adding that the Bar should stop making partisan calls to initiate action.

No decision

Speaking to reporters later, Dzaiddin said although he has met the two judges, a decision has yet to be made as he has not completed evaluating all the facts and situations involved.

The chief justice said he needed time to make a thorough evaluation but was confident that the matter will be resolved by the judges themselves.

Asked if he had referred the matter to the college of judges, Dzaiddin said he has consulted other judges and was considering to call all High Court judges for a discussion.

However, he strongly dismissed any possibility of conducting a tribunal to settle the matter as suggested by the Bar Council chairperson Mah Weng Kwai last Saturday.

Mah, who was also present, declined to comment when met later.

No knowledge

In a related development, the Penang Bar committee denied any knowledge of the 10 lawyers from the state who publicly expressed their concern over the 'alarming headlines' pertaining to the Bar Council's involvement in the judges' dispute.

When contacted today, committee chairperson Petra Oon said she didn't know who the lawyers were but believed that the majority of the 900 members in the state were with the Council in calling Dzaiddin to set up a tribunal to resolve the matter.

"We stand by the Council's statement. At the same time, I think everyone is entitled to their own views."

The group of lawyers, including senior members represented by an unnamed spokesperson, was quoted by The Star on Monday as accusing Council members of getting even with Nathan because he had heard the suit against them initiated by lawyer K Raja Segaran.

The daily reported that Raja Segaran had sued the Bar Council to restrain it from commenting on the judiciary.

The seven newly appointed Court of Appeal judges who took their oath of office today were Abdul Aziz Mohamad, Pajan Singh Gill, Richard Malanjun, Ariffin Zakaria, Rahmah Hussain, Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Hashim Yusoff.