A retired policeman has challenged the extension of service of a High Court judge who had reached the retirement age of 65 and who has since been elevated to the Court of Appeal.

Salim Hashim, 76, filed a civil suit at the Penang High Court on July 6 questioning the re-appointment of Justice Mohd Noor Abdullah whose service was extended for six months after he turned 65 on Oct 29 last year.

The judge was then given another six-month extension during which he was promoted to the Court of Appeal on June 17. This will expire on Oct 28.

In his suit, Salim also described the six-month extensions given to several other Court of Appeal and Federal Court judges as "unlawful" but did not state their names.

It is learnt that the four defendants - the government, attorney-general, prime minister and chief justice - raised a preliminary objection to the suit when the matter was heard at the Penang High Court on July 13.

No locus standi

When contacted, Salim's lawyer Darshan Singh Khaira said senior federal counsel Abdul Rahim Uda had argued before Judicial Commissioner Zabidi Mat Diah that his client had no locus standi (jurisdiction) to question the appointment.

"The defendants contended that my client because he is not an aggrieved party to the appointment. Asking for the suit to be struck out at this stage, they claimed that only the government and the AG can do so," he said.

"However, we countered that a judge's appointment affects members of the public and that my client who is a legal citizen of the country can raise the matter. If not the public, then who else?"

Darshan said Justice Zabidi had set Aug 3 for decision.

Salim is seeking, among others, a declaration under Article 125(1) of the Federal Constitution that the tenure of judges of the High Court and the Court of Appeal cannot be extended after they reach the retirement age.

He is also seeking a declaration that the amendment to the constitution which allows the extension of civil servants until the age of 66 does not apply to judges at all levels.

'Love for the country'

In his affidavit filed to support the law suit, Salim claimed that as a Malaysian citizen and a tax payer, he has locus standi to question the legality of such extensions.

Apart from "love for the country", the former policeman said the other reason why he had initiated the action was due to his interest as a party to pending court cases.

He said it was important for him to raise the issue as the judiciary - which is funded by the public - was established to ensure justice for all Malaysians and to protect their constitutional rights.

"I have a legitimate expectation that all legal provisions must be adhered to because it is important for the sovereignty of the country...there should not be any doubt (over) any appointment of judges to ensure public trust (in) judges," he said.

"I would suffer adverse consequences if the legality of the judges hearing my cases (were to be) questioned (and) where their judgments would cease to have effect."

Reading the constitutional provisions on the appointment of judges, Salim said he believed that there is no legal basis to allow the government to extend the services of judges who reach the official age of retirement.

"Justice Mohd Noor Abdullah turned 65 on Oct 29, 2004 but yet his service was extended to another six months which allowed him to continue sitting on the bench until April 28, 2005. He was given another six-month extension until Oct 28, 2005," he said.

"Furthermore, there are other judges at the High Court and Court of Appeal levels who were given six month extensions. This is unlawful."

Salim also said there is no evidence to suggest that the King had agreed to the extensions which made the decision ultra vires the constitution.