An independent judicial commission (IJC) should be set up to appoint members of the judiciary, as part of comprehensive reforms towards transparency of the process, said the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam).

In its report entitled The Right to an Expeditious and Fair Trial released last week, it said that the current process allows partiality to creep in and has failed to ensure that only competent judges are appointed.

The report - based on feedback gathered from judges, prosecutors, lawyers and law academicians during a forum last April - said an independent statutory body would ensure that a competent, independent and impartial judiciary is put into place.

Transparency and accountability of judicial appointments would be enhanced and the public can be assured that only competent individuals are appointed as judges. This in turn would increase public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary, the report said.

Suhakam recommended that the IJC be equipped with powers and functions that would enable it to audit and renew judicial appointments.

"It should consist of members of the judiciary and lay persons to ensure that the process is accountable, fair and modern... (and be) empowered to develop operation policies, systems and processes for appointments," the report said.

It must also have authority to investigate complaints and provide advice to the chief justice on the workings of the judicial appointments system.

Impartial views

Suhakam said the current practice - where the chief justice discreetly consults members of the Bar and the Attorney-General's Chambers before making a recommendation to the Prime Minister - must become the choice of last resort so as to ensure accountability and transparency.

"Whilst it cannot be discounted that members of the judiciary are familiar with the candidates and that such consultations may prove to be useful, the appointments process should not open itself to criticism or be placed in a position where the need to disprove a prejudice or partiality could arise," the report said.

"(To) obtain balanced and impartial judicial views, it is recommended that the selection panel should take into consideration judicial consultation and also the candidate's own referees and other references selected by the selection panel."

Suhakam also called for systematic documentation of the assessment of each candidate against broadly defined criteria to ensure that standards are applied and that appointments are based on merit.

"Other testing methods apart from interviews and references, such as psychometric and competences tests should also be encouraged."

Equal opportunity must be provided for candidates to demonstrate their qualifications, while details of the selection process, the criteria for eligibility, and the final decisions should be publicised.

"Prospective candidates should be invited to make a formal application should they wish to consider judicial office and to provide a lost of information," the report said.

Old complaint

The forum participants had pointed out that the competency of judges has a bearing on the efficiency of the judicial system and speed of disposal of cases.

There were also complaints about the process of judicial appointments because of the absence of clear and objective selection criteria.

These complaints were not new ones. The Bar Council has been critical of past appointments where several senior and competent judges were bypassed and junior members of the bench were given posts instead.

At the conclusion of the forum, Suhakam chairperson Abu Talib Othman had promised that the appointment of judges would a main focus of the report.

Copies of the report have been submitted to the AG's Chambers, Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and the Bar Council.