‘Judges must read submissions’

The Star
by SHAILA KOSHY

KUALA LUMPUR: Court of Appeal judges may read case notes before a hearing but not at the expense of the written submissions and appeal record.

Lim Chee Wee said Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Raus Sharif told the Bar Council that this has been communicated to his judges.

While rogue lawyers could, as alleged by some quarters, try to influence registrars in writing case notes favouring one party, Lim said, such abuse would be ineffectual if judges read the written submissions and appeal record.

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, who often appears in the Court of Appeal and Federal Court, said registrars/law clerks in many countries wrote briefs for their judges, including Singapore.

“However, here, we get the impression that judges haven’t had the time to read the actual file.”

They were responding to the front page article in The Star yesterday on a small group of lawyers who like to boast they can fix cases. Known as the “Dream Team” or syndicate/cartel, their puppet master is a retired judge.

But can our judges possibly read every file? The Federal Court case load on Jan 30 was a typical one – nine appeals, of which three were civil matters and six were criminal appeals, of which three were death penalty cases

Lim admitted there was no necessity for registrars to prepare case notes if lawyers prepared their written submissions on time and in a format judges found easy to understand.

He said they accepted there was much room for improvement in writing submissions.

Requesting anonymity, a practitioner of some 40 years said there would be less opportunity for abuse if there was no “obsession to clear the backlog of cases”.

“When I started practice, judges had three cases a day, not nine.

“Cases shouldn’t take 30 years but what’s the difference if a case takes two or three years to complete.

“At the end of the day, the judge has a duty to explain clearly in his grounds to the loser why he lost.”

Lim said Raus had implemented a new timetable so judges would sit one week and spend the following week writing and reading.

He said judges today worked very hard in comparison, adding that an appointment to the Bench was “no longer a semi-retirement plan” for lawyers, those from Judicial and Legal Services, or Attorney General’s Chambers.”

Imtiaz praised Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria’s empanelling of five judges in the apex court.

“We have seen greater participation (from all the panel) and hence (there is) lesser opportunity for corruption.”

Imtiaz added Arifin should have an audit process to monitor his judges based on the Judges’ Code of Ethics, and set up a system for self-correction.

Meanwhile, Kelana Jaya MP Loh Gwo Burne released another video clip alleging case fixing in the judiciary, reports TEH ENG HOCK.

The two-minute clip released yesterday shows his father asking an unidentified man to request a judge to help in his case and the man replying that there was no need because his “wheeler-dealer broker” friend was there.

In 2007, a Royal Commission of Inquiry was set up to look into the fixing of judicial appointments after Loh released the VK Lingam clips.