The judiciary's renaissance man

Malay Mail
 Down2Earth with TERENCE FERNANDEZ

First published in Malay Mail on 25 Aug 2011

THE country's outgoing Chief justice (CJ) Tun Zaki Azmi is one man who will admit that he is not prone to making mistakes.

In an interview with The Malay Mail on Monday, Zaki revealed his fears when asked to take on the job by (then) Prime Minister Datuk Seri (now Tun) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

"I gave reasons why I should not be appointed as CJ," Zaki shared in the candid interview at his office at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya.

He said he feared that "old stories" with regards to his private life as well as his link to the ruling party would not make him the ideal candidate when Abdullah approached him for the job in mid 2007. It would even give critics fodder against him and those who appointed him.

Furthermore, if he were to say "Yes", Zaki would be an outsider, directly appointed into the Federal Court -- the nation's first.

But as Zaki said: "If the Prime Minister comes down to your level and asks you to do something, how do you say 'No'?"

And so the Umno lawyer and Disciplinary Board member entered the record books on Sept 5, 2007 following his direct appointment as a Federal Court judge.

Following which he was elevated to President of the Court of Appeal three months later and then Chief Justice on Oct 21, 2008.

When I interviewed Abdullah before Zaki's appointment in 2007, Pak Lah opined that he felt Zaki (despite the so-called "baggage") was a good candidate as he was not from within the system. Hence, he said Zaki would bring fresh approaches to the judiciary, long seen as archaic and out of touch with the masses.

There was also a matter of trust that was a consideration for the then premier. This included having someone he could rely on to help push through his reforms to gain back public confidence and respect for the administration and especially the judiciary.

Zaki did not want to draw parallels to the judiciary, post and pre-1988 (the year of the infamous siege on the judiciary by the executive) in terms of whether the institution had regained some semblance of confidence from the people.

He was also conscious of the fact that his appointment further exacerbated some of the loud criticisms on the government, the ruling party and the judiciary.

"I made it a point not to hear any political case, but of course people can say by virtue of my position as CJ, I can influence," he sighed.

Zaki may have managed to silence some critics, following certain judicial decisions which were not in favour of the ruling coalition but the verdict is still out on whether he has been able to gain mass confidence.

His fast-tracking of cases, computerising case filings to reduce corruption in the court offices, unprecedented appointment of members of the Bar to the Bench and the setting up of new civil courts are among the steps he has taken to make the system work better for both counsel and clients.

The notorious delay tactics of parties have also been reduced as cases are heard faster and even thrown out or given judgment in default if parties abuse the court's time.

Zaki's experience as a lawyer lent itself a sense of empathy to those who deal with the courts everyday. He brought with him his years of experience being on the other side, where he had even made a controversial remark about having to "bribe" court officers to expedite his firm's cases.

But whether cutting red tape, making judges more accountable for their actions and decisions may be seen as taking the judiciary into uncharted waters of accountability, to the public at large, it must also mean ensuring justice is served.

Several contentious issues were brought before the courts, such as that of S. Shamala who was fighting for custody of her two children who had been taken by her Muslim-convert husband.

Many felt the court had missed a great opportunity to once and for all settle the prickly issues surrounding the jurisdiction of the Civil and Syariah courts.

Zaki was quick to point out that there was a contempt proceeding against Shamala who had by then fled to Australia with her children.

Here he emphasised that even the court's hands were tied: "The court can only decide on what is put before it!"

The debate on whether he was one of the better CJs we have had will rage on long after Zaki's retirement on Sept 12.

But what one cannot deny is the unprecedented access Zaki had given to the public at large and what he has done for the judicial system.

There are two sides to a coin and as much as he has gained plaudits for his efforts, he has also failed to convert some critics who prefer to deal with his past and focus on his political links.

By his own admission, Zaki is not perfect and will have to answer for some of his decisions and actions made before and during his tenure.

Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria, a career judge who is poised to take over, may want to review some of these efforts. This includes the fast-tracking which some lawyers say is a victim of its own success as cases are moved up for hearing even though parties are not prepared.

But Zaki is confident that his successor will continue his efforts.

As he says, being an "outsider", he felt he had a lot to prove to his brother judges.

But the feedback I received from Zaki's contemporaries in the Federal Court including Arifin, Tan Sri Raus Sharif, Tan Sri James Foong, Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin and Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong is that he has revolutionised the judiciary.

If they feel that Zaki is a tough act to follow, then surely, he must have done some things right and the judiciary is better for it.

The Chief Justice's full interview with The Malay Mail will be published the following week. Feedback: terence@mmail.com.my