Yet another Pak Lah rhetoric on Judiciary?

I am sure Azmi Sharom must be gaining new fans from his column Brave New World in The Star, like his latest article, ‘Is the Government serious or not’ which I have it linked here.

I would agree with him totally on ‘Personally, I would like to see the Prime Minister, as the head of the Executive, having nothing at all to do with the appointment and promotion of judges. Only in that way can there be true separation of powers, our main safeguard against tyranny.’

Excerpts of his article:

‘…Zaid then promised not only a JAC but also to return Article 121 to its original form.

Article 121, for those of you who have never slept through a Constitutional Law lecture, is about judicial power. It used to be that the Judiciary determined its own jurisdiction, i.e. what cases it could, and could not, hear.

Article 121 was amended in 1988 to give that power to Parliament. So now Parliament has the power to tell the Judiciary what sort of cases it can judge. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the separation of powers.
Frankly, I think that is the only reason for this plan to be “put on hold”. The Government wants to control the Judiciary. It doesn’t want an independent bench. It doesn’t want the citizens of this country to enjoy the security of a competent court whose powers are separate and safe from the political machinations of the Executive and the Legislature.

If a JAC made up of reputable “primary stakeholders”, and not by toadying civil servants and politicians, is not established, and if Article 121 is not returned to its original form, then whatever shred of credibility this government may have will be destroyed.

His objectivity is excellent for a judge, if only he were one, and, provided the judiciary is truly independent of the Executive.