10 January 2020 – Putrajaya International Convention Centre
This ceremony of the Opening of Legal Year 2020 with the theme “Moving Forward – Reshaping Judicial Reform – A Tripartite Synergy” was attended by former Chief Justices of Malaysia, Chief Justice of Singapore, Chief Justice of Indonesia, Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat, Attorney-General of Malaysia, all the Judges of the Federal Court, Court of Appeal and High Court throughout Malaysia together with many members of the Malaysian Bar, Sabah Law Society, Advocates Association of Sarawak, and presidents and representatives of Foreign Bars and Law Societies.
In line with this year’s theme, the Chief Justice of Malaysia Tan Sri Tengku Maimun in her speech focused on how reshaping judicial reform in Malaysia requires a strong tripartite synergy between the Judiciary, the Bar and the Attorney General’s Chambers. The Chief Justice’s focus is on strengthening judicial independence and the overall efficiency of the judicial system. Judicial independence is bolstered by continuously emphasising the need for a judiciary that is free of influence, whether from the other arms of Government, the public, the media or internal pressures.
On the proposed judicial reforms, the Chief Justice said that the reform initiatives by the former Chief Justice, Tan Sri Richard Malanjum will continue to be implemented and supplemented by newer reforms. The following salient points were emphasised in the Chief Justice’s well-prepared speech:-
1. Judicial Academy : Currently, the Judicial Academy has been operating under the auspices of the Judicial Appointments Commission with courses conducted periodically by senior judges and the occasional guest speakers, both overseas and local on an ad hoc basis. A draft Bill to revamp the entire structure by introducing legislation to establish a formal Judicial Academy is ready and will be presented to the Cabinet in due course.
2. Revamping the Rules of Court 2012 to enable substantive reform to civil procedure so as to enhance access to justice. Civil appeals in interlocutory cases are proposed to be limited as trivial appeals tend to have a “snowball” effect on the efficient disposal of trials as they clog up the system.
3. Hearing of applications for leave to appeal to the Federal Court is proposed to be heard by only a single Judge of the Federal Court instead of the current hearing by at least 3 judges which took up significant judicial time and resources.
4. E-Appellate and going completely Paperless : So far considerable resources both judicial and financial were wasted for hearings in appellate courts particularly for sittings in Sabah and Sarawak which required the transportation of voluminous hard-copy of cause papers. The plan is to achieve full digitalisation where all parties will be able to refer to voluminous documents on a single electronic device such as iPad or laptops. The Judiciary, the Bar and AG Chambers will have to adopt a new mind set and be ready to move forward in tandem with numerous other jurisdictions which have already implemented these technological advancements.
5. Continuous Legal Education and the Need to Improve Standards : The need for continuous legal training is essential for judges, lawyers at the Bar and in public service. While many quarters are quick to comment adversely on the quality of our judgments, no one seems to state that the quality of advocacy, submissions and legal research leave much to be desired. Declining standards of the Bar do not assist judges to write judgments of quality. While the Bar and AG Chambers will have to improve their own standards of advocacy and research, the Judiciary proposes to continue its internal reforms to further improve its own standards.
6. Judicial Clerkship Program and Encouraging Further Studies Among Judicial Officers : Judiciaries in the United Kingdom, USA, and Singapore place reliance on Justice’s Law Clerks whose main functions are to serve as a Judge’s research assistant. Our Judiciary has approached the administration of almost every Law Faculty of every local University to recruit the brightest and most capable graduates to attach with the Judiciary for the Judicial Clerkship Program. New talent aside, the Judiciary is also working on improving the current pool of talent among its officers.
7. Fighting Corruption : Another crucial aspect topping the Judiciary’s list of priorities is the battle against corruption. The need to eradicate this menace and its effect, if discovered in the Judiciary, is obvious. No tolerance on corrupt practices. The Judiciary has implemented a policy that officers will be transferred once in every three years to ensure that they do not get too comfortable and prone to temptation at their work station.
8. Improving Efficiency of Court Processes by Digitalisation : Modern technological advancements serve primarily to boost access to justice. Developing the process is therefore absolutely necessary. For 2020, the Judiciary intend to implement e-Court to the remaining 82 locations at all levels of the Court hierarchy.
9. Expansion of e-Review : Intention is to expand it to all levels of the Court hierarchy at the 20 stations which currently enjoy the e-Court platform subject to budgetary constraints. Sabah and Sarawak have enjoyed this facility for many years.
10. Financial Autonomy : Until recently the Judiciary had no autonomy over either the allocation of funding it required, or the expenditure of the funds allocated to it. All initiatives required the approval of the relevant governmental body. Now, the Chief Registrar has finally been allowed to take on the role of Financial Controller, thus affording the Judiciary some degree of financial autonomy. The importance of financial autonomy cannot be sufficiently stressed as it comprises a hallmark of judicial independence.
11. Analysis of Statistics : Both the Subordinate and Superior Courts are at 90% in the disposal of its caseload. All judges at all levels of Judiciary are commended for working tremendously hard at ensuring the speedy and effective resolution of cases within the timeline stipulated. The statistics serves as a guide to ensure that the caseload is dealt with within a projected time frame as undue delay affects the justice of a case. However, the Judiciary is mindful that it is substantive justice that is the true measure of the success of the Judiciary’s performance.
Kommentare