APRIL 24 — I read Philip TN Koh’s “The (mis)reading of the Right Honourable Chief Justice of Malaysia’s speech at the 24th Commonwealth Conference”.
Then I read Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s speech entitled “Judicial Independence and Parliamentary Sovereignty — a Colossi of Roads?” — again.
I must agree with senior lawyer Philip TN Koh, who is also Adjunct Professor, Universiti Malaya, that the Chief Justice did not advocate “a form of juristocracy, i.e. the judiciary being an unelected body embarking on a road to establishing judicial supremacy over elected officers that represents the sovereign will of the people.”
Neither did the Chief Justice make “such an assertion nor was there discernible any desire to promote her own virtues or character.”
The speech has been available on the Malaysian Bar website since April 9. Kudos to the Bar for publishing the speech. Read it here.
Chief Justice of Malaysia Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat attends the Opening of the Legal Year 2024 at Putrajaya International Convention Centre January 15, 2024. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon
Concluding her speech, the Chief Justice said as follows:
“In closing, it is essential to reaffirm that the Malaysian system is founded not on parliamentary sovereignty, but on constitutional supremacy. At all times, the Federal Constitution stands as the highest authority, establishing the framework within which all branches of government — the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary — must operate. No single branch is supreme in its own right; rather, each derives its legitimacy and powers from the Federal Constitution itself.
“Within this framework, the unequivocal role of the Judiciary is to uphold the supremacy of the Federal Constitution by ensuring that parliamentary and executive power remain within their constitutional limits. This duty demands that judges adjudicate cases with absolute independence, impartiality and integrity, without yielding to fear or favour. They must stand resolute in the face of adversity, undeterred by criticism or external pressures. Judicial independence is not an end in itself but a paramount means to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails within the constitutional framework.
“At the same time, a constructive and balanced relationship between the Judiciary and the other branches of government is essential to preserving judicial independence while respecting the democratic mandate of Parliament. This relationship is not a contest for supremacy but a partnership in governance — one founded not just on mutual respect but on a clear understanding of our respective constitutional roles. While our functions remain distinct, both institutions ultimately serve the same fundamental purpose of safeguarding constitutional democracy and protecting the fundamental rights of citizens.”
Clearly, the Chief Justice has called for “a constructive and balanced relationship” between the Judiciary and the other branches of government, and not just the executive.
She acknowledges that the relationship is “not a contest for supremacy but a partnership in governance — one founded not just on mutual respect but on a clear understanding of [their] respective constitutional roles.”
Did the critics misread, or did they not read, the speech?
To put it in Manglish, got read or not?
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
