Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim has dismissed allegations that two High Court judges who convicted ex-deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim for corruption and sodomy were 'rewarded' with promotions.

Saying that the claims were baseless, the judiciary chief stressed that all eight judges elevated to the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court today were chosen based on many factors which include "ability, integrity, experience and social conduct".

"There are so many factors to be taken (into consideration) and we have considered every factor that we can think of before we promote them," he told reporters after an oath taking ceremony at the Kuala Lumpur Federal Court building this afternoon.

Report confirmed

The ceremony confirmed a malaysiakini report yesterday that justices Arifin Jaka and Augustine Paul who had convicted Anwar for sodomy and corruption respectively, were among the four High Court judges elevated to the Court of Appeal.

The other two were justices Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud and Nik Hashim Nik Abdul Rahman.

It also confirmed rumours that Court of Appeal judge Pajan Singh Gill, who headed a three-member panel which dismissed Anwar's sodomy appeal, was to be promoted to the Federal Court - the country's highest court.

For Pajan, his move to the Federal Court was considered swift as he was promoted to the appellate court less than a year ago.

The other vacancies were filled by Abdul Hamid Mohamad, Mohd Noor Ahmad and Rahmah Hussain.

Chief justice Ahmad Fairuz said that it was unfair for anyone to claim that these judges were promoted merely because they had decided against Anwar, who is currently serving a 15-year jail sentence in the Sungai Buloh prison.

"I know some people say that the appointment of those judges who had heard the Anwar cases showed that the judiciary is not independent.

"I think that is the wrong way to look at it. Judges have taken their oath. They have to look at the evidence and apply the law to the facts until they are convinced that there are sufficient evidence to convict," he said.

Promotions fair

He added he was satisfied with the way the Anwar cases had been handled and was confident that all the judges involved had acted independently.

The chief justice also said that it would be ludicrous to deny any competent judges of promotion just because they had decided against Anwar.

"It is also bad to say that just because the judges have heard Anwar Ibrahim's case, they should not be promoted. If the judges who heard his case are good - and they deserved to be promoted - why not?" he said.

He said such a view is unfair to the judiciary who had also made some favourable decisions and cited the case of Keadilan Youth chief Mohd Ezam Mohd Nor whose bail application was allowed by the Shah Alam High Court.

"The court had heard Ezam's case and ruled in favour of Ezam. Why didn't they say that this not an independent decision? Why keep quiet on that? When the court decided in their favour, the court is independent, but if it is otherwise, it is not... That cannot be right," he said.

As to allegations that the rulings made in those cases had gone against trite principles of laws, Ahmad Fairuz said that it was a senseless claim.

"They (Anwar's cases) have gone to High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. You mean that all the judges had gone against the trite principles of law? You know how many judges are involved there?" said a visibly irritated CJ.

"Don't tell me all these judges had gone against all principles of law! That is too far fetch, isn't it? I think it's high time for the public to realise that decisions against the government do not mean that the judge or the court is independent," he said.

Other factors

When asked to comment on the fact that the judges promoted today were mostly junior judges , he said since 1983 the judiciary had adopted the view that seniority is only one of the many factors that must be considered for promotion.

He said this was in line with Principle 13 of the United Nation's Basic Principle Independence of Judiciary which among others stressed that ability, integrity and experience are the most important factors to be considered in appointing judges.

"All factors have been taken into consideration, including seniority... But I don't think we should promote judges based on seniority alone. That will create dead woods. The seniors will not bother to work because when the time comes, they will go up," he said.

When told that some members of the Bar Council felt that some of the five most senior judges are as competent as those promoted today, Ahmad Fairuz said: "Well, the lawyers judge from their angle but as the chief justice, I judge not only on the angle of the lawyers who only know the judge when they go to court. I know the judges more than that... I also know about their personal life."

He said a good judge must not only be good in reading the law - their social conduct and good image are equally important.

"It's not easy to be a judge. Apart from being good in law - his personal life, the way he mixes with people, what people say about him... All these are important too to really make a good judge," he said.

The CJ also said there was no need to revise the procedure on the appointment of judges and that he was happy with the transparency within the judiciary.

"We have to be fair to the judiciary and the government. When we decide for the government, people claim that we are not independent and that the government had interfered. That's not fair to the government. As far as I am concerned, the government has never interfered in the judiciary," he said.