If seniority is not the main criteria for the promotion of judges then the other necessary attributes must be clearly spelled out and explained, said Bar Council chairperson Yeo Yang Poh.

This was necessary so that the process of judicial promotion is not shrouded in secrecy and no adverse inference could be drawn concerning the evaluation process itself, he said in a statement yesterday.

"If it is felt that seniority need not play the dominant role in judicial promotions, then any other system that is put in its place must be one that is comprehensive and well thought-out," he added.

Yeo said the council had for some time advocated for a consultative, transparent and accountable system as contained in the proposed Commission for Judicial Appointments and Promotions .

As there was currently no alternative and better system, the traditional method should only be departed from in the rarest of occasions, he added.

'Less suitable'

Yeo was responding to Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim's statement Tuesday that seniority is not the main criterion for the elevation of judges to higher courts.

Seniority is taken into consideration, but will not be the ultimate criterion when making the selection. If a junior is better than the senior merit-wise, then the junior will get it, he had said.

Meanwhile, Yeo said the concern of the promotion of junior judges over senior judges was not related to the junior judges themselves but the unfair and unhelpful implication that the judges by-passed were considered 'less suitable' for promotion.

Several past promotion exercises of judges to the Federal and Appeal Courts had raised questions as to whether the criteria other than judicial had influenced the selections.

Due to the lac of transparency in the selection process of judicial appointments, it is unclear how junior judges were chosen over their more senior colleagues.