Tun Suffian’s LegacyIn Service of the Law – Simplicity & Greatness
By Salleh Buang
Tun Suffian Foundation Inc. 2007
"I yield to no one in recognition of the difficulty and importance of the office which I now have the honour of occupying. In evenly balancing the scales of justice, I will help to maintain the Rule of Law and two essentials of that Rule are the Independence of the Bar and the Independence of the Judiciary."
- Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim
when elevated to the Bench on 26th October 1961
Professor Salleh Buang did not pen a biography of Tun Suffian. Nonetheless, the writing helps us to know enough of Tun Suffian, his passion for the law and justice, and many other aspects of his life. The contributions of the late Tun Suffian towards the development of the law and the constitution are presented in a balanced manner.
In his Preface, Salleh Buang wrote about his relationship with the late Tun Suffian and described Tun Suffian as a “Towering Personality”. He then goes to describe the early life of Suffian, the journalist, Suffian’s career in the civil service and his meteoric rise in the legal service.
In 1956, at the age of 39, Suffian was asked by the Conference of Rulers to draw up the Malaysian Constitution. In 1958, Suffian was promoted as Senior Federal Counsel in the Attorney-General’s Chamber. In 1959, Suffian was made the Solicitor-General. Hardly 2 years, Suffian was elevated to the Bench as a High Court judge.
In 1964, Suffian was appointed to act as the Pro-Chancellor of University Malaya. Suffian was also actively involved as a Higher Education Advisory Council member. He was also an External Examiner in Law for the
In
Salleh Buang also wrote about the judicial crisis and his analysis and deliberations provide the readers fresh insights into that unfortunate phase of Malaysian judicial history. The dismissal of Tun Salleh Abas in 1988 and the ensuring constitutional crisis is a matter of public record. Tun Salleh’s dismissal was the greatest blow to our judicial independence in Malaysian history. In
Referring to Tun Salleh’s dismissal, Tun Suffian recalled: “The news resounded throughout the world and reached
According to Tun Suffian, “Tan Sri Hamid Omar knew that should anything happened to Tun Salleh he was to be his successor. The AG who was supposed to assist the Tribunal by putting before them all the facts pros and cons, instead acted as a prosecutor.”
Tunku Abdul Rahman, the First Prime Minister of Malaysia wrote in his Foreword to Tun Salleh Abas’s Book “May Day for Justice”:
“This terrible episode of sacking the Lord President should serve as a lesson to the people of Malaysia as well as to people in many developing countries where judicial independence is seen by those who wield power only as a inconvenience and a threat to what they arrogantly believed is their God-given right to do as they please.”
Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, in his doctoral thesis, and subsequently published in his book, “Freedom under Executive Power in
“The government has sent a message to the judiciary that judicial decisions deemed likely to impinge upon the powers of the government or the ruling coalition may result in retribution taken against the judiciary or against specific judges. In short, the Malaysian government purposely sought to deny the nation’s judiciary of its independence”.
In his book “May Day for Justice, Tun Salleh Abas said:
“It (the judiciary) has been attacked in the belief that judges tend to act as if they believe in the supremacy of Parliament rather than the supremacy of the Constitution.” “…It is very true that a number of judges showed weakness of spirit. They have to answer for their sins in their own way. Accidents of history have made unjust men judges in the same way thieves and poachers have sometimes attained the position of watchmen and game warden.”
“I became absolutely disillusioned with the law,” Tun Salleh was quoted to have said.
As regard to the executive position of a Law Minister, Tun Suffian had this to say:
“The Law Minister is what his designation indicates. He is the Government’s lawyer, advising Government on legal matters, just as a private lawyer advices his clients. He is not Minister of Justice. He has no say in the running of the courts.”
As regard to the interference from the Executives, Tun Suffian said: “I know that I will be spared the fate of a Chief Justice of Ghana who was fired by President Nkrumah after acquitting some men whom the Government wanted to go to prison, or the fate of a Chief Justice of Uganda who has never been seen again after being spirited away by burly men from his Chambers, after delivering judgment adverse to President Idi Amin. ..To prevent an Idi Amin from destroying the judiciary, the public should be educated to believe in the value of an independent judiciary, and judges should so conduct themselves, both in and out of Court, in a manner to win public respect and even their affection, and not be eccentrics who respond to social convention with careless independence…”
On the whole, the book is a "Must" read for LLB law students and those who are sitting for their CLP. It will also be a good read for those interested in the subjects of law and jurisprudence.
For those who are interested to buy the book, you can get a copy at MPH at RM69.00
6 comments:
The development of laws are not made a common knowledge. We're at lost where it is heading really. Despite the happenings around the legal communities that at times is quite a tempest, we are really in the dark as to development of the legal principles itself..
Gukita,
I believed the Judicial system is being led by the executive's influence. For as long as judges do not exercise independence, the law is as good as what the Executive said.
Mave,
I totally agree with you in so far as the application of Justice is concerned. But Justice itself is never static; there are Universal Justice that is true regardless of time and Applied Justice (I'm using my own term now) that must be dynamic and able to ensure that Justice is applied in changing time and values. This value system that changes over time - who's overseeing it? Where is it leading to? Are we the public been made aware of it? Are we given a chance to be part of its development?
Gukita,
Law is and should not be static as it must evolve with time and social desirability.The value system is supposed to be managed and monitored by the law-makers, the parliamentarians, who forms the legislature. They ideally are elected as wisemen to lead the nation and make the nation a peaceful and harmonious place for the citizens. But our legislators do not perform such duties, they are more concern about enriching themselves as they are afraid their 5-year tenure will end with them receiving less than the billion-dollar dream. At such, the legislators becomes capitalist wealth-diggers.
Mave,
How could Justice be uphold if law makers are lead by their noses? When certain laws are passed to be discussed are they briefed as to the principles of law behind it and the direction the law to be passed will take, in order to go to another point nearer to certain desired Principle of Justice? Who is tracking this path? Or which body? Are Schools of Law taking this responsibility? If they are, are they doing something to educate the law makers so that they understand perfectly what they are voting for in Parliment?
Gukita,
I have to agree with you. However, note that we have several institutions such as Bar Council and Suhakam who keeps track and advices the legislators and the govt; only thing is, they turned a deaf ear to all advices and pleas. Not only that, the govt often accuses them of being an opposition tool and subversive. But the oligarchy are great strategists; they know how to use religion and race to the greatest effect to maintain and sustain power and wealth for themselves.
Post a Comment