According to a source, Zaid refused to budge on certain provisions which he considered imperative. The source confirmed a report by The Malaysian Insider that Zaid did indeed want a 13-member, rather than the proposed nine-member, commission to be formed.
By Shannon Teoh, The Malaysian Insider
And so the next battle begins.
With the opening act done, the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) now takes centre stage and the legislation to set up the panel will likely see a fiercer debate in Parliament than what was seen for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
While criticism of the MACC came mostly from Pakatan Rakyat (PR), holes have been punched in the JAC from various quarters, including former judges, the Bar Council and Sabah Justices of Peace.
Whereas Barisan Nasional (BN) had the help of calling on similarities to the lauded Independent Commission Against Corruption from Hong Kong - to the point where its deputy commissioner Daniel Li was invited to praise the law in local media - with regards to the MACC, the JAC appears to pit Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi against the rest of the country.
The proposed law has had a storied genesis, beginning with its celebrated announcement at a Bar Council dinner on April 17.
Then de facto Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim immediately faced stern opposition from within the Cabinet itself on certain measures.
Sources from Abdullah's office also revealed to The Malaysian Insider that there were conflicting suggestions from consulted parties.
It became clear that a compromise was needed if the Bill were to ever see the light of day.
However, when it comes to the law and Malaysians, "compromise" is a dirty word, and is synonymous with being "compromised." And so, it will be unsurprising when PR MPs call the Bill an unsatisfactory and insufficient half-measure in Parliament today.
According to a source, Zaid refused to budge on certain provisions which he considered imperative. The source confirmed a report by The Malaysian Insider that Zaid did indeed want a 13-member, rather than the proposed nine-member, commission to be formed.
The members that Zaid is said to have wanted were the heads of the Bar Council, The Sabah Law Association and the Advocates Association of Sarawak.
"This faced opposition on two counts - one that certain lawyers do not accept these bodies as representing them, and also that appointment candidates would find themselves beholden to certain lawyers influential in these bodies," explained the source.
The Malaysian Insider understands that Zaid insisted that the attorney-general be included in the commission but the Bar Council wanted the AG out.
In the end, Abdullah lost his appointed reformer in the Cabinet as Zaid resigned, ostensibly feeling that if he could not push for full judicial reform, then he wanted no part of it.
"I think it required patience and compromise to convince the Cabinet but it became clear that Zaid did not want to give in," an aide who worked alongside Zaid on the Bill said.
And of course, if the Cabinet could not accept the earlier draft, then it was unlikely that BN lawmakers would stand for it either.
There were also further complications in ensuring that the JAC, and any reform bill for that matter, would not require amending the constitution.
For example, the opposition continues to insist that the PM's prerogative in the appointments process should be limited.
Ironically, Abdullah's advisors believe it would be an impossible task as it required amendments to the Federal Constitution.
"BN no longer has two-thirds majority. And as long as the opposition is dead set on criticising government bills, what hope is there that they would play ball?" an aide said.
It was learnt that the opposition under then Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah was twice furnished with details of the JAC. Consultations have also been held with the various stakeholders.
Not surprisingly, the government is now taken aback at the criticisms being levelled by these same quarters who had been consulted with and imply that some have chosen to misinterpret certain clauses in the Bill.
An example given by one officer who worked on the Bill when speaking to The Malaysian Insider, was former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Shaik Daud Shaik Mohd Ismail, whose opinion was sought when the Bill was being formulated.
He was reported in the New Straits Times as saying that the PM could ask the JAC to recommend two new names for any superior court vacancy continuously until he received the name he wanted under Section 27.
The officer insisted that Section 27 explicitly says it can happen only after receiving the initial recommendation as detailed in Section 26 but not after receiving a second set of names.
For now, few will care about the good faith or intentions of the government, and even after the bill is passed, it will still have to battle the prevailing public distrust in the judiciary.
No comments:
Post a Comment