Chief justice (CJ) Arifin Zakaria and attorney-general (AG) Abdul Gani Patal today took aim at unnamed senior lawyers for what they claimed were unfair criticisms against the judiciary and the AG Chambers.

The duo took issue with an article on a news site - which they did not name - titled, 'Judiciary comes under attack for not respecting the rule of law'.

"I must say it is disheartening to note that a handful of lawyers have repeatedly made use of public media and public fora to make unjustified crticism against the judiciary, and more so on the decisions of the court, knowing well that as members of the Malaysian Bar they are obliged to act with candour, courtesy and fairness.

"And any attack on the judiciary which undermines the confidence of the public in this institution amounts to an attack on the administration of justice," said Arifin in his speech at the opening of the Legal Year 2015 in Putrajaya this morning.

Both Arifin and Gani - during their speeches - read out the same excerpts of the article published on The Malaysian Insider, quoting constitutional lawyer Tommy Thomas (right) in a forum in May last year.

"Most Malaysian judges fail to recognise that the federal constitution is the supreme law of the land, and this is the reason public law litigation is dead in this country," they quoted the article.

They also highlighted Tommy's complaint about the attorney-general's penchant for objecting to challenges brought against the authorities, over alleged arbitrary action.

'Public law litigation is not dead'

Addressing this, Arifin said the "preponderance of judicial review cases" involving fundamental rights - which are disposed of in the court on a daily basis - belies the senior lawyer's statement.

"Secondly, the allegation that public law litigation is dead in this country is an inaccurate statement in light of the myriad of decisions in the past year or so where the Malaysian courts have upheld the constitutional rights vigorously," he further said.

Gani - in his speech - also addressed the allegation, stating that his chambers had a right to object to challenges against the government.

"The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has a right to object, to defend the government.

"It is unthinkable to say that in all these kind of cases, all applications made by the other side, that the AGC must just keep quiet," he stressed.

He added that if such an argument stands, then there will be no necessity to have an AGC in the first place.

Gani (left) pointed out that lawyers should know better on how to criticise, as well.

"Criticism must be honest criticism, and not in this manner. Criticism made against the judiciary must be in the proper place and proper manner," he emphasised.

Echoing this later, Arifin said that while judges were not infallible, they are entitled to expect that counsels will treat the court and each other with "fairness, courtesy and candour".

Arifin criticised the “falling quality of lawyers”, which he said the judicial bench had, for a long time, "tolerated".

He also made reference to Bar Council president Christopher Leong's often glowing praise of the late Perak Sultan Azlan Shah, who was Lord President of the Federal Court.

"The chairperson of the Bar spoke in glowing terms of the golden age of the judiciary then.

'The Bar Council used to be better too'

"Well, to my mind, it stands to reason that that particular period was also the golden age of the Bar," he pointed out.

Arifin said the dignity and honour of the legal profession is dependent upon how lawyers respect the judiciary.

"In my view, no lawyer deserves his scholarship if he continually contaminates the system with intemperate behaviour," he added.

Earlier, Leong (left) had - in his speech - stressed that no institution, including the judiciary, was above criticism.

However, he noted that criticisms should be constructive, instead of simply hurling vitriol and abuse.

"Criticism, even in strong terms, of judgements - which in effect, serve to correct or point out an injustice or advance the administration of justice - should be accepted or even welcomed," he said.

Arifin also addressed criticisms that the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) was not transparent in nominating potential judges, calling the allegations "unwarranted".

"The judicial appointment process cannot be expected to be conducted in a public forum or open field.

"A report of the JAC is tabled in Parliament annually, as required by law, detailing the activities of the JAC if anybody bothered to read it," he said.

He added that since the introduction of the JAC, there has also been an increase in the number of judges appointed from among the Bar - which the Bar Council also acknowledges.

The Legal Year 2015 is the sixth gathering of judges, lawyers and judicial officers, to review the state of the legal profession in Malaysia and its plan for this year.