The integrity of the judiciary has been badly mauled by a legal lion> who does not mince his words no matter how high or mighty a judge> thinks he is. He has called a spade a spade and certain members of the> judiciary an incompetent and even an idiotic bunch!>> All the Chief Justice (CJ) and the judges in the Palace of Justice> have managed to do is remain mum, mute and mumble amongst themselves> as N H Chan methodically makes them out for who they really are and> the mockery they have made of the law!>> The respected, renowned and retired Justice N H Chan is very> frustrated, fed-up and furious at how the judiciary which he had> served so faithfully has been reduced to a farce run by those who are> legal and intellectual frauds or what he has called imposters>> With each passing compromised judgment N H Chan unhesitatingly hits> out at judges with an increasingly sharper sting. He leaves no stone> unturned, no errant judge uncovered. They can no longer mask their> hyperbole judgments with unintelligible garbage.>>>> In his latest scathing critique, he said the rakyat is stunned by the> ignorance of our judges of the highest court in the land, as seen in> the recent Federal Court's decision not to review Anwar Ibrahim's> application to review its previous decision dismissing his application> for disclosure of documents for his second sodomy trial.>> N H Chan said the Federal Court's approach to Rule 137 of the Rules of> the Federal Court 1995 was inconsistentand dishones and those> ignoramuses were talking utter nonsense. Those inane judges cannot> even understand plain English He put it very plainly and painfully!>> Calling the three-member panel of Justice Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin,> Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Heliliah Mohd Yusof incompetent, he added> perhaps they were clowns as their statements were laughable.>> His searing criticism was that they …do not know justice from> injusticeand that such lowly individuals should never be allowed to> sit on the seat of Justice…(and) to be judges at all. And yet there> are so many of them in the judiciary today ever since the rot begun.>> He shredded into smithereens the judicial renaissance of the CJ: Our> country does not need impostors, who pose as judges, to deceive the> common people any longer. The common citizenry can now uncover the> impostors hiding beneath the mantle of the judicature.>> He laid bare the judicial sham: With judges such as these in the> Malaysian judiciary where, to them, the principles of the law are not> to be consonant with justice to be manipulated by them to uphold> injustice, it is no wonder that the errant judges have forfeited the> confidence of the people.>> He left them with a stinging slap in the face: The general public> does not respect such judges anymore! They have put themselves beyond> the pale. Just like pariahs. Dont you think they should be despised?>> On High Court judge Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah's rejection of> Anwar's application to have the judge recuse himself from further> hearing the sodomy trial, N H Chan said that the judge was talking> utter nonsenseand knew next to nothing about judicial bias>> He added that the moral of this unsavoury episode is this: if you> appoint mediocre lawyers to the Bench you will get substandard judges.> The solution to this problem is a simple one. Appoint judges from the> cream of the legal profession and you will not find me assailing the> judges for incompetence simply because I will not be able to do so.> Such was his cutting conclusion: It is only when we have fools on the> bench that I can point out that what they have decided is not the law.>> â€œBunch of idiots in high placesâ€>> N H Chan had not spared the judges in the cases related to the Perak> constitutional crisis of his very strong language when scrutinising> their decisions (with the exception of Kuala Lumpur High Court Justice> Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim whom he had praised).>> He highlighted the bad and perverse judgments, especially those in the> appellate courts, the collective written judgements which were riddled> with contradictions and how the Perak and Federal Constitutions were> toyed with and trampled on by the judges!>> During the Perak debacle N H Chan had said that there are many of our> judges today especially among those judges in the higher echelon of> the judicial hierarchy who do not seem to know the true meaning of> separation of powers in constitutional law. This is most apparent.>> He called some of the judges of the cases of the Perak imbroglio:>> a) Bad judges – they seem to think that independence means that they> can do what they like>> b) Recalcitrant judges – they think that words can mean whaatever they> want them to me>> c) Humpty Dumpty judges – they also think that they are independent of> the legislature>> N H Chan has brought to light how beholden the judiciary is to the> Umno-dominated Government. He said the so-called Perak crisis has> brought out a host of cases that showed that the judges gave the> impression that they were one-sided. The perception of the people is> that they sided with the BN government.>> In the âshocking caseof Zambry v Sivakumar in the Federal Court, he> called the judgment by the â€œinfamous five (judges) Alauddin Mohd> Sheriff , Arifin Zakaria, Nik Hashim Ab Rahman, Augustine Paul and> Ahmad Makinnuddin, perverse decision>> In the case of Nizar vs Zambry he called the panel of five Federal> Court judges made up of the President of the Court of Appeal Alauddin> Mohd Sheriff, Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin Zakaria, Zulkefli Ahmad> Makinuddin, Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Abdul Hamid Embong, myopic judges.>> They were lost in a quagmire of confused thinking caused by their own> incompetence. They found themselves deep in the forest unable to see> the wood for the trees. Does this mean that we have a bunch of> incompetent judges who sit in the highest court in the land?>> Alas, with the help of N H Chan the public especially those in Perak> were able to see for themselves how members of the judiciary had left> behind a dead constitution, badand perverse decisions, dubious> declaratory orders, judgments devoid of reasoned grounds, and> disgraceful double standards.>> Blind and Biased Judges>> N H Chan has judged the judges. He considers them, especially those in> the appellate courts ignorant, inane, incompetent and even idiots> (which he has strongly inferred).>> The public shares his view. In their eyes the judiciary has allowed> itself to be intimidated, its independence and impartiality interfered> with, and its integrity reduced to ignominy.>> In the light of the severe criticism of N H Chan of the judiciary> (which is quite unprecedented by a retired judge), surely the Chief> Justice cannot stand idly, silently and stoically by – unless Zaki> Azmi strenuously, staunchly and solemnly agrees with him!>> Further if Zaki continues to remain silent the public will assume that> he shares N H Chan's searing criticism of the judiciary. Logically he> would have to resign for he has allowed the reputation of the> judiciary to be sullied irreparably.>> The judicial shenanigans whom N H Chan has criticized and castigated> should also resign for having shamelessly sacrificed justice on the> altar of political expediency.>> N H Chan's comments on members of the judiciary have no doubt been> bold, blunt and blistering. He has accused judges of being blind,> biased and being a bunch of idiotsand fools. He has thrown the> gauntlet down.>> If the CJ disagrees with N H Chan's criticisms he should haul the> former Court of Appeal judge into court and demand that the latter> shows cause for why he should not be cited for contempt! Does Zaki> have the guts to take up the gauntlet or will he prefer to allow the> judicial circus to go on?>> N H Chan has made no bones about it. His blitzkrieg on the judiciary> will continue. Bad guyshad better beware! He will ensure that their> names remain in infamy for generations to come unless they recant the> wrongs that they have done! He will even write their obituary and if> they outlive him there will be others who will take his place!>> N H Chan sees the next general elections as the only solution to an> unsalvageable judiciary viewed by the public with greater suspicion,> skepticism and even scorn. He once commented. At the present time and> judging by what we have experienced so far from the Perak takeover> cases, the quality of most of our judges is suspect>> In the meantime what should we do with so many bad apples in the> barrel? If only there could be a change in government in the next> general elections with the opposition winning by a landslide. Then we> could get rid of all the bad apples by Act of Parliament.