FridayOL

Kuala Lumpur, May 22 – The National Human Rights Society of Malaysia (Hakam) has issued a strong call for greater transparency and equitable treatment in the recent extensions of judicial tenures. This statement follows growing concerns regarding the perceived lack of clarity and consistency in the decision-making process, which Hakam believes could potentially undermine public trust in the judiciary and the rule of law.

Hakam’s concern stems from observations that the extensions, while seemingly providing stability within the judicial system, have not been accompanied by sufficient explanation or justification. The organization believes that the public has a right to understand the rationale behind such significant decisions impacting the composition and experience of the courts.

“Transparency is paramount in ensuring accountability and maintaining public confidence in our institutions, particularly the judiciary,” stated a spokesperson for Hakam. “The extensions of judicial tenures are matters of significant public interest, and the process by which these decisions are made should be open and understandable.”

The Principle of Equal Treatment

Beyond transparency, Hakam emphasizes the importance of equal treatment. The organization notes that differing approaches to tenure extensions among judges can create perceptions of favouritism or bias, which can erode the integrity of the judicial system.

“It is crucial that all judges are treated fairly and consistently when it comes to tenure extensions,” the spokesperson continued. “Any deviation from established principles should be clearly justified and publicly explained to avoid any appearance of unfairness.”

Impact on Judicial Independence

Hakam further argues that the manner in which tenure extensions are handled can indirectly impact judicial independence. A lack of transparency and consistency can create an environment where judges may feel pressured or influenced by external factors, potentially compromising their ability to make impartial decisions.

“Judicial independence is a cornerstone of a democratic society,” Hakam asserted. “Any action that could be perceived as undermining this independence must be carefully scrutinized and avoided.”

Recommendations for Improvement

To address these concerns, Hakam proposes several recommendations:

• Public Disclosure of Criteria: The criteria used to evaluate judicial tenure extensions should be publicly disclosed and consistently applied.
• Justification for Decisions: Clear and concise justifications should be provided for each tenure extension decision.
• Independent Review Process: Consideration should be given to establishing an independent review process to ensure fairness and transparency.
• Consultation with Stakeholders: Engaging with legal experts, civil society organizations, and the public in discussions about judicial tenure policies.

Hakam believes that by adopting these measures, the judiciary can strengthen public trust, uphold the rule of law, and ensure that all judges are treated with fairness and respect. The organization remains committed to advocating for a transparent and accountable judicial system that serves the interests of all Malaysians.

This call for transparency and equal treatment reflects Hakam’s ongoing dedication to promoting and protecting human rights in Malaysia, including the right to a fair and impartial justice system.