MGG Pillai Commentary View

<< Previous || Next >>

"Don't You Know I, A High Court Judge, Dispense Justice?"

When workers at the Royal Selangor Club in Kuala Lumpur picketed, roundly abusing their Sikh supervisor in placards and vocally. He applied for an injunction to prevent his name abused. It, in due court, was heard. The High Court judge wanted to know if the man was present. He was, in the public gallery. His Lordship told court reporters what he was about to say should not be reported, turned to the man's lawyer and barked: "Do you know who this man is? I will tell you who he is!" He was, by then, at a finely-tuned pitch of ire. In open court, he deliberately and incessantly defamed the man, describing him as "the Bhai fellow", making clear he deserves perdition, not justice. The lawyers present in court are shell-shocked by this gross judicial breach of etiquette. But then why should they when such judicial behaviour does not occur as often.

His Lordship then told an extraordinary tale. A month so earlier, he had lunch at the Royal Selangor Club with an ambassador. With the guard's permission, he and the ambassador parked their cars beside each other in the grounds. (Since he had to ask for permission, it is fair to presume there was some doubt if it could be.) During lunch, a guard came and whispered in his ear that his car, parked where it should not, had been clamped. When he demanded why, another guard told him it was on orders from the top. He then shouted at him: "Don't you know who I am? I am a High Court judge dispensing justice! My car has the crest which should tell you who I am: a High Court judge!" The guard contacted the supervisor, this self-same "Bhai fellow", and reported back: "My supervisor says he could not care less if it was the Prime Minister, but rules are rules." This embarassed him terribly, he told the by-now embarrassed court, what would his lunch companion, an ambassador no less, think of him? Then he advises the lawyer to withdraw the action. Besides he should not expect to have it heard since every judge is a member of the Club.

This judicial arrogance is typical. Litigants galore can attest to it. When judges break the rules, it is in the interests of justice. When ordinary mortals do so, they should be punished to the full extent of the law. If he wanted to say what he said, why did he not call the parties into his chambers and said his piece there. But he coccoons himself in his typical arrogance to believe nothing would happen however wrong his actions. We have a judge who would not recognise a lawyer in his court because the lawyer did not acknowledge him in a supermarket. The chief justice goes on holidays with a crony lawyer, who also helps write the judgement in a case in which is an interested party. The Conference of Rulers so ignores the chief justice that his nominations to fill vacancies in the courts are studiously ignored. Rumour suggests it would not any nomination from him. His retirement in December is eagerly awaited by the Bar, most of the judges, the government. The judicial rot is so ingrained into the system that only massive surgery could reverse it. Until then, we have to bear the antics of such judges as His Lordship.

M.G.G. Pillai
pillai@mgg.pc.my