HOME

INTRODUCTION

Judicial independence not only serves as the pillar of Malaysia's democratic system but also the ultimate bailiff of justice, freedoms, and the rule of law. Nevertheless, the path towards attaining judicial independence via restructuring the judicial appointments procedures exposes a murky story of institutional difficulties, political unrest, and unmet expectations.

The constitutional path Malaysia follows in choosing judges shows a continuous conflict between democratic values and pragmatic consideration of political control. Notwithstanding constitutional clauses meant to protect judicial independence, historical events from the 1988 judicial crisis to the Lingam video clip scandal have revealed serious shortcomings in these safeguards. Most recently, the operational paralysis of the Judicial Appointments Commission ('JAC') resulting from unfilled positions shows how structural flaws still compromise the promise of real judicial independence.

With an eye towards the JAC established in 2009, this article critically examines the constitutional and legal framework governing judicial appointments in Malaysia. It follows the historical circumstances that demanded reform, assesses the deficiencies of the present system by means of legal and comparative analysis, and suggests thorough structural improvements so as to enhance the JAC's independence and efficiency; an environment essential for judicial independence. The central idea of this article is that only a thorough reform of the selection process that eliminates executive control by involving multi-stakeholder participation and transparent merit-based selection can allow Malaysia's Judiciary to attain a respectable measure of independence.

In a typical construction contract, the issuance of the Certificate of Practical Completion ('CPC') marks not the end, but rather, the commencement of a critical exercise, which is the preparation of the Final Account and the issuance of the Final Certificate. This stage is significant for the Contractor as it would reflect whether the contract/project has resulted in the financial outcome that it forecasted previously.

Whilst the legal implications of the Final Account and Final Certificate under other standard forms of contract in Malaysia, such as the Standard Agreement and Conditions of PAM Contract 2018 ('PAM 2018') and the Standard Form of Contract to be used where Bill of Quantities form part of the Contract PWD Form 203A Rev. 2007 ("PWD Form") have been of considerable discussion, the interpretation and operation of similar provisions under the JKR Sarawak Form of Contract PWD 75 (Ver. 2021) ('JKR Sarawak Form') remain relatively unexplored.

In this regard, this article seeks to analyse the relevant clauses in the Sarawak JKR Form, particularly on the operation of the clause governing Final Account and Final Certificate, the Contractor's procedural obligations, the conclusiveness of the Final Certificate, and whether a final account claim may still be pursued through statutory adjudication under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 ('CIPAA') for final account claim.

The apex court rules that transactions premised on gambling activities are against public policy and are illegal, null, and void.

A gambling debt is not legally enforceable in Malaysia on grounds of public policy, the Federal Court has ruled. In delivering the unanimous judgment of the court, Justice Nordin Hassan noted that the government had repeatedly and firmly voiced its stance against gambling in Parliament on grounds that the public derives no benefit from it.

Globally, there is an unfettered right of access to court proceedings by the public, which is consilient with the principle of open justice as it is regarded as an essential tenet of any justice system to guarantee public confidence, independence, and accountability in the administration of justice. In Malaysia, Section 15 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 states that all civil and criminal matters shall be deemed to be open and accessible to the public. Journalists are often keen to report on cases that are newsworthy and those that garners public interest wherein they act as an intermediary between the public and the courts.