The Bar Council said there is no "credible explanation" for several judges to 'leapfrog' over their more senior colleagues for promotions to the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court today.

The council - which represents 10,000 lawyers - added that the entire process suggested a "lack of propriety".

"The judicial promotions ... has unfortunately confirmed the fears that such an important aspect of our system of justice has been treated with indifference to transparency and objectivity and in the absence of consultation with the Bar," said its chairperson Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari in a statement.

He questioned whether the favouring of junior judges in the appointments meant that senior judges were unsuitable for the task, which therefore raises the issue of what is the acceptable criteria for promotion.

Kuthubul said the appointments leave many questions unanswered and as such is a cause for alarm since judicial promotions was a "legitimate concern to the Bar and public especially when passing over appears to have become the rule rather than the exception."

Having 'delivered'

Meanwhile, United Nations special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers Param Cumaraswamy said the promotions of Augustine Paul, Ariffin Jaka and Pajan Singh Gill will be perceived by the public as a reward for having 'delivered'.

High Court judges Paul and Arifin - who had heard the trials of jailed ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim - were promoted to the Court of Appeal.

Whereas Pajan - who was promoted to the Court of Appeal recently - has now been moved up to the Federal Court. He was among the three judges who had dismissed Anwar's sodomy appeal.

Param said the most crucial matter now is the perception of the public on the independence of the judiciary, especially since the present procedure on judicial elevations is "fraught with considerable suspicion."

"The chief justice may say otherwise. But what matters most is public perception.

"An independent judiciary is the right of all consumers of justice. It is neither the right nor privileges of judges," he said in a statement.

According to Param, he had made his opinion known to Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim following today's appointments.

"I have told him that his call to judges to be independent and impartial expressed when he assumed the high office of the chief justice did not match the recommendations from his office," he said.

"How can the judiciary be seen as independent when the very criteria to secure such independence are not applied or seen to be applied?" he asked, adding that he has also raised the issue with defacto law minister Dr Rais Yatim.

Param's statement also reiterated an earlier call to establish an independent judicial commission to select and recommend promotions and judicial appointments.

"The present procedure is most unsatisfactory. It vests too much power in one people like the chief justice on selection and recommendations," he said.