Pm S Role In Judges Appointment Not To Control Judiciary Expert

---

 


The prime minister’s involvement in appointing judges is not to control the judiciary but to keep the government informed about developments within the judicial institution, according to a constitutional expert.
Associate Professor Shamrahayu Ab Aziz said the prime minister’s role in advising the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the appointment of judges is enshrined in Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, a provision that has been in place since 1957.
“I believe that one of the reasons the provision was made was so that there would be involvement from the government in matters related to the judiciary.
“There is a separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive, with the prime minister and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as the head of state, representing the executive,” she said when contacted by Bernama yesterday.
She said this in response to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s speech at the 24th Commonwealth Law Conference in Malta, which mentioned proposals to amend the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) Act 2009 to remove the prime minister’s role in the appointment of judges.
Tengku Maimun said removing the prime minister’s role in judicial appointments would strengthen the impartiality of the selection process, ensuring that appointments are based solely on merit and free from any perception of political influence.
Associate Professor Shamrahayu Ab AzizArticle 122B of the Federal Constitution stipulates that judges shall be appointed by the Agong, acting on the advice of the prime minister, after consulting the Conference of Rulers.
Shamrahayu said the JAC Act stipulates that the prime minister may only recommend candidates or advise the Agong based on names proposed by the commission.
“Although Article 122B grants the prime minister significant power, it is subject to the control of the JAC. Therefore, the prime minister’s authority can be regulated through mechanisms within the commission,” the law expert said.
She added that removing the prime minister’s role in judicial appointments required careful review, as it carried significant implications for the country’s legal framework.
- Bernama

---