Ex-judges haul govt to court over failure to increase pension
Thirty-five retired judges and dependents have filed a lawsuit against the government over alleged failure to increase pension payouts.
Retired Court of Appeal judge Mah Weng Kwai, now a lawyer in private practice, and 34 other plaintiffs filed the Originating Summons at the Kuala Lumpur High Court last week.
The legal action named the Malaysian government, the...
Thirty-five retired judges and dependents have filed a lawsuit against the government over alleged failure to increase pension payouts.
Retired Court of Appeal judge Mah Weng Kwai, now a lawyer in private practice, and 34 other plaintiffs filed the Originating Summons at the Kuala Lumpur High Court last week.
The legal action named the Malaysian government, the prime minister (who is not named), cabinet ministers (who are not named), and the Public Services director-general (who is not named) as the first, second, third and fourth defendants, respectively.
According to a copy of the cause papers made available to the media today, 28 of the plaintiffs are retired judges of the Federal Court and Court of Appeal, as well as the High Court in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak; while the remaining seven plaintiffs are widows of deceased judges.
They contended that the defendants failed to prescribe, via an order in the Gazette, an appropriate higher percentage than two percent annually to the pensions and other benefits to each plaintiff, in line with Section 15B(2) of the Judges Remuneration Act 1971.
The plaintiffs contended that the defendants had effected an amendment to Section 15B, which allegedly changed the calculation of the pensions.
They claimed that initially, the unamended Section 15B would calculate the pensions based on an automatic adjustment to correspond to the salary increase of serving judges.
The plaintiffs, however, claimed that when the amendment to the provision (Section 15B(1)) was made and took effect on July 1, 2015, it resulted in the pensions being adjusted annually by a two percent increment, while not even taking into account or reflecting the increase in serving judges’ salaries.
They further claimed that this purported failure has “continuously altered the pension and other benefits of each of the plaintiffs to their disadvantage” in breach of Article 125 (7) of the Federal Constitution, read with Article 125(9) of the said Constitution.
Article 125 of the Federal Constitution deals with the tenure of office and remuneration of judges of the Federal Court.
“The plaintiffs are aggrieved by the anomalous and unconstitutional situation which has been brought about through the non-adjustment of their constitutionally-protected right to advantageous adjustment of their pensions pursuant to Articles 125(7) and 125(9) of the Federal Constitution, as embodied in the Judges’ Remuneration Act 1971.
“These retrospective amendments have adversely altered the pensions of the plaintiffs to their detriment and disadvantage owing to the non-implementation of parts of the amended provisions, in outright breach of Articles 125(7) and 125(9) of the Federal Constitution,” said the plaintiffs.
They contended that the present lawsuit was filed following the government disregarding their letter of demand dated Sept 17 last year.
They explained that the legal letter had sought for the defendants to pay to each plaintiff, within two weeks beginning Sept 17 last year, “one lump sum the amount each of them is entitled to”.
Among the reliefs, the plaintiffs sought through the suit is an order for the prime minister and the cabinet ministers to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to prescribe, via an order in the Gazette, the appropriate higher percentage of increment than two percent annually to the pension and other benefits.
The former judges and dependents also seek, among others, pre-judgment interest on the amount awarded at five percent, to be calculated from July 1, 2015, until the date of judgment; as well as a five interest on the amount awarded, to be calculated from the date of judgment until full settlement.
The plaintiffs are represented by lawyers from law firm Chooi & Company + Cheang & Ariff.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.