JUDICIAL REFORM OR POLITICAL APPOINTMENT IN A NEW FORM?

JUDICIAL REFORM OR POLITICAL APPOINTMENT IN A NEW FORM?

By: Khairul Faizi bin Ahmad Kamil

When the newly appointed Chief Justice once served as a UMNO Division Chief, a former Deputy Minister, a former Senator, and even a Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate in past elections, one cannot help but ask: Is this what we call judicial reform?

A functioning democracy rests on the cornerstone of judicial independence from political influence and executive power. The judiciary is not just a body that delivers verdicts, it embodies justice, national dignity, and public trust in the system.

If the highest judicial post is filled by someone with a clearly established political background, how can the people be assured that the system is truly impartial and free from bias?

Reform is not just a slogan. It is not merely about replacing individuals with those deemed more "trustworthy", but about dismantling outdated structures and cultures that allow political dominance over critical national institutions. Judicial reform must prioritise integrity, legal qualifications, and above all, public perception of independence.

Some may argue that individuals can change. Yes, people can evolve. But when it comes to institutional integrity, public perception is everything. A system of justice must not only deliver fairness, but it must also be seen to be fair by the people.

Does this appointment strengthen public confidence in the judiciary, or does it instead reinforce the belief that the justice system remains shackled by old political patterns?

I am not questioning the individual, but I am defending the principle. If the reform that was promised ends up leading us back to political appointments under a new label, then this is not reform, it is a continuation of the old culture in a new suit.

KFAK