Kim Quek
Just as the nation is heaving a sigh of relief at the exit of the
scandal-ridden Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Justice, in comes another
dubious candidate poised to take his place.
Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's sudden announcement of the
appointment of Zaki Azmi to the second highest post in the judiciary
– President of the Court of Appeal – must have jolted and dismayed
many who have cherished hopes of judicial reforms following the
reluctant retirement of Fairuz. After all, Zaki Azmi, who had not
spent a single day as a judge in the court of appeal or the high
court, was parachuted to the nation's highest court – the Federal
Court – only three months ago. He has not even warmed his seat as a
judge, and yet he now looks poised to succeed Chief Justice Abdul
Hamid Mohamad five months from now when Hamid retires in April 2008
upon reaching 66 years of age. (Both Zaki's and Hamid's appointments
were simultaneously announced by the Prime Minister on Dec 5).
In fact, when Zaki was appointed a Federal Court judge in September,
he was instantly recognized at home and abroad as the person planted
to the highest court to succeed Fairuz, whose request for a six month
extension of service beyond his mandatory retirement on Oct 31 was
not accepted by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Such instant recognition
of Zaki's mission came from his deep involvement with UMNO as a key
party player. He was chairman of the party's election committee,
deputy chairman of its disciplinary board of appeal, party legal
adviser etc.
As UMNO's legal man, he was involved with the party's myriad of
scandalous financial misadventures that were bailed out by the
government in the heydays of Mahathir's crony-capitalism during the
last Asian financial crisis. One prominent example is the RM 3
billion loan scam in the disastrous acquisition of Philippines'
National Steel Corp. (NS) by UMNO's financial proxy Halim Saad. When
the shares of NS became scrap, four top Malaysian banks were made to
stomach the entire RM3 billion losses. And Zaki was then a director
of the investment vehicle - Hottick Investment Ltd of Hong Kong –
which borrowed the RM 3 billion and embarked on the acquisition of NS.
Apart from acting as UMNO's nominee, Zaki also has held directorship
in scores of major companies including some of the most well known
names such as Berjaya, Metacorp, Pan Global, SP Setia, Malaysia
Airports, Hume, Matsushita Electric, Pharmaniaga, etc. Zaki was
reported by Bernama on 21 April 2007 to have said that his 58% owned
Emrail Sdn Bhd, a railway specialist company, had only the government
as employer, and that he was earnestly soliciting contracts in the
northern and southern portions of the double-tracking project to turn
the cash-strapped Emrail around.
Such political and business background would already have made him a
poor candidate for any judicial appointment, Zaki is battered by yet
another serious handicap – the question of his moral integrity
arising from his controversial marriage and divorce from his second
wife Nor Hayati Yahaya, who was half his age.
Zaki married Nor Hayati in a ceremony conducted by a kadi from
Thailand in a textile shop in Perlis in March 2005. They separated
three months later. In the messy divorce that ensued, it was revealed
that Zaki burned the original marriage certificate to hide the
marriage from his first wife. Furthermore, the marriage was ruled by
the Syariah court as illegal.
Following the revelation of Zaki's marital trouble, he resigned as
deputy chairman of UMNO's disciplinary board, for which he commented:
"Considering that members of the disciplinary board are of the
highest integrity, I have made this decision following reports in the
media....." (New Straits Times, 9 Aug 2005)
The question we must ask now is: If Zaki is morally unfit to serve in
UMNO's disciplinary board, how could he be considered morally fit to
be a federal court judge, not to mention his lightning elevation to
the No. 2 position, and anticipated imminent rise to the top job in
the judiciary?
Is this country so poor in legal talent and integrity that we have no
choice but to appoint some one so glaringly unsuited for such
important judicial position arising from his multiple conflicts of
interests and questionable integrity? If not, then why did the Prime
Minister make such a move? If it is not to advance the Prime
Minister's and UMNO's interests, then what motivated such an
appointment?
We have already seen in the infamous Lingam video clip how the former
Chief Justice betrayed his oath of allegiance to the country and the
Constitution by crawling to serve the parochial interests of his
political and business masters, thus confirming the common knowledge
of the depth of degradation our judiciary has sunk. While the Prime
Minister and his cabinet is still dilly-dallying over the appointment
of a proper royal commission of inquiry to probe into the Lingam tape
scandal almost three months after its public display, are we now made
to swallow another UMNO atrocity – the instant elevation of an UMNO
stalwart in the nation's highest court?
However, in the midst of despair over UMNO's latest move, we detect
something amiss in the Prime Minister's announcement of this dual
appointments (Hamid and Zaki). While the PM claimed that upon his
advice, these appointments were assented to by the Agong after
consultation with the Council of Rulers, no effective date had been
decided for Zaki's appointment, while Hamid's was fixed on Nov 1 -
the day he started duty as Acting Chief Justice. Neither had any date
been decided for the handing over of the appointment letters. If
these dates had not been decided, why was PM in such a hurry to make
an incomplete announcement?
Knowing that the King and the Council of Rulers had previously
declined to accept nominees deemed inappropriate fill the vacancies
of the President of Court of Appeal and Chief Judge of Malaya
respectively, as well as having turned down Fairuz' request to
continue as Chief Justice, the suddenness of PM's claim of royal
assent – particularly in reference to Zaki's controversial promotion
– came as a surprise to many people. Did the Agong also assent to
Zaki's appointment? If so, why couldn't Zaki's date of appointment be
also decided alongside with Hamid's? Or was there a problem of royal
assent?
Whatever the case may be in regards to Zaki's appointment, it is
pertinent to take serious note of the view expressed by the Sultan of
Perak, Raja Azlan Shah, on public perception of judicial impartiality
in his opening address to the 14th Malaysian Law Conference on 29th
Oct 2007.
Raja Azlan Shah, one of the most illustrious Lord Presidents of
Malaysia, said that judiciary loses its value and service to the
community if there is no public confidence in its decision-making.
And the principal quality in judiciary is "impartiality", which
exists in two senses – the reality of impartiality and the appearance
of impartiality. Of these two, the appearance of impartiality is the
more important, stressed the Sultan.
Taking cue from this observation, Zaki's appointment is an
unmitigated disaster, as even if he has the superhuman capability to
totally severe his umbilical cord to the ruling party and his
commercial interests to eliminate conflict of interests, there is
still the insurmountable problem of public perception. With Zaki's
questionable background, there is no way he can command complete
public confidence, particularly when the interests of UMNO or his
businesses are involved.
Coming at a time when Malaysia's competitiveness is fast loosing
ground, which has been contributed in no small way by its worsening
judiciary image, such a daring raid on the sanctimonious ground of
neutrality as the judiciary through planting a party stalwart to take
over its control is destined to bring ruinous consequences to this
country. Not even in the height of Mahathir's autocracy would such a
reckless adventure be contemplated.
Knowing UMNO's arrogance and supreme confidence over its political
hegemony, we do not think that it is open to advice from the public.
We therefore earnestly appeal to the Agong and the Rulers to exert
their benevolent influence empowered by the Constitution to protect
our judiciary from further injury, as they have so valiantly done in
the recent past.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail has been sent via JARING webmail at http://www.jaring.my
No comments:
Post a Comment