A small price to pay
Published: May 14, 2001 9:32 PM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM
Malaysiakini : What is your reaction to the controversial report on our judiciary, "Justice in Jeopardy"?
Param : I was very surprised with the government's response to the report. (Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) Datuk Rais Yatim said that he read the whole thing only on the Internet. But the government has still not answered what happened to the draft which was sent here before publication.
I am told that it was sent through the Malaysian mission in Geneva, via the International Commission on Jurists. The mission conceded that they sent it to Wisma Putra. Neither Wisma Putra nor anyone in the government said what happened to the draft. The government was given a chance to respond. The four organisations were prepared to publish the response ("[#1] Malaysian judiciary attacked by international law bodies [/#]", Apr 7).
Now, it is said the key persons were not met by the commission. Who are the key persons? The Attorney-General? He refused to see them. They wanted a meeting with him, he refused. He was a key person in the Anwar Ibrahim trial. The prime minister, in fairness to him, he was not well during that period. Some senior judges, together with the chief justice, had a five-hour meeting with them. Two meetings I was told.
Hence, what more could they expect of this mission? They did everything they could. The chief justice is saying that he never received a copy of the report earlier. Now, why can't they come out publicly and respond to the contents of the report rather than making vague accusations of bias, etc? I would rather these people accept reality. Evaluate the scenario here before things deteriorate further. They must accept the fact that there are serious problems and start working from there.
Malaysiakini : That could mean cleaning up the whole...
Param : Yes, why not? See what is happening to the judiciary in the Philippines.
Malaysiakini : Indonesia's Attorney-General Marzuki Darusman said that his country would have to sack all their judges...
Malaysiakini: What is your reaction to the controversial report on our judiciary, "Justice in Jeopardy"?
Param: I was very surprised with the government's response to the report. (Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) Datuk Rais Yatim said that he read the whole thing only on the Internet. But the government has still not answered what happened to the draft which was sent here before publication.
I am told that it was sent through the Malaysian mission in Geneva, via the International Commission on Jurists. The mission conceded that they sent it to Wisma Putra. Neither Wisma Putra nor anyone in the government said what happened to the draft. The government was given a chance to respond. The four organisations were prepared to publish the response ("[#1]Malaysian judiciary attacked by international law bodies[/#]", Apr 7).
Now, it is said the key persons were not met by the commission. Who are the key persons? The Attorney-General? He refused to see them. They wanted a meeting with him, he refused. He was a key person in the Anwar Ibrahim trial. The prime minister, in fairness to him, he was not well during that period. Some senior judges, together with the chief justice, had a five-hour meeting with them. Two meetings I was told.
Hence, what more could they expect of this mission? They did everything they could. The chief justice is saying that he never received a copy of the report earlier. Now, why can't they come out publicly and respond to the contents of the report rather than making vague accusations of bias, etc? I would rather these people accept reality. Evaluate the scenario here before things deteriorate further. They must accept the fact that there are serious problems and start working from there.
Malaysiakini: That could mean cleaning up the whole...
Param: Yes, why not? See what is happening to the judiciary in the Philippines.
Malaysiakini: Indonesia's Attorney-General Marzuki Darusman said that his country would have to sack all their judges...
Param: Yes. Marzuki and I are in a same committee. When he was chairman of the Indonesian Human Rights Commission, he gave it some teeth. And recently during the Bank Bali case, the Jakarta Post came out strongly alleging impropriety on the part of the judge who threw out the indictment.
Marzuki was reported to have said that he was going to investigate the public prosecutor, whether he took any bribe. The minister of justice also said he was going to investigate the judge, whether he took any bribe. They were openly, transparently talking about it. What is so wrong in discussing all that?
The judiciary, too, is accountable. Judges are not above the law. If they are seen misconducting, then the public must be free to express and complain. To hear such expression stifled particularly through the judicial process is beyond belief.
Judges have certain insulations. These insulations are to secure their independence. It will be an abuse of the judicial power to use these insulations to suppress or stifle exposure of any misconduct on their part.
Malaysiakini: You know Musa Hitam well. He has served a stint as chair of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. Now he is back in the hot seat again as head of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission. Can he deliver?
Param: Human rights commissions are set up in many countries today. There is a lot of pressure on governments to set up such institutions from the UN. The mere fact that such an institution is set up doesn't mean that the human rights situation in the country is going to improve overnight. Nevertheless, the success of the commission will depend largely on the commitment, the independence and the courage of the commissioners.
Malaysiakini: How do you see legislative restrictions imposed on the Human Rights Commission?
Param: Irrespective of limitations in the legislation, the commission could achieve its objectives with some creativity in addressing the issues. I have confidence in the chairman and the commissioners. We must give them time. Civil society must give it the support. The NGO community could annually evaluate the performance of the commission. Such evaluations would be a useful feedback for the commission itself. For example, the UN Human Rights Commission's performance is evaluated by international NGOs after each annual session.
Malaysiakini: The chief justice who was to retire last month was given a six months' extension. Is that because they haven't got enough people to find a replacement?
Param: I am sure if there is political will, suitable replacements could be found. The objective of this six months' extension is to enable the judge concerned to wind up and complete unfinished work like outstanding judgments. On that premise, the judge concerned, whether chief justice or not, should not hear any fresh cases during those six months.
Malaysiakini: Do the litigations you are facing affect your work?
Param: It has affected my work. I had to leave a large firm where I was actually the chief executive partner. I virtually grew with that firm for about 30 years. Came up the ladder and became the most senior partner.
Malaysiakini: Were you asked to resign?
Param: No, I was not asked to resign but with all those news reports of the suits, sometimes given headline coverage, some of my partners became jittery. You cannot possibly allow yourself to remain there and see anything adverse happening to the firm. It was a very large firm. It came up very well in the last 30 years.
We had about 60-odd lawyers and 100 over staff when I left. I just could not think of my own self interest and remain there and make it difficult for others. So the best thing to do was to part company - do what I think was right and let them continue with their practice.
Malaysiakini: Was the sacrifice worth it?
Param: Well, it's a small price to pay really. When you see the things I saw in the last six years, harassments and intimidations on lawyers and human rights defenders and attacks on judges. People sacrifice their lives for these causes. The UN and the international community have stood by me the last five years. That has been a great support. They know what I am doing and what I mean.
Malaysiakini: Would you change anything you have done, given the chance?
Param: No. Somebody asked me this question, I think the foreign press in Geneva. Whether I regret having investigated Malaysia and gotten into all this, I said, no, not the least because, when I go around the world and report about how the governments in those countries should conduct themselves to improve the judicial system, how can I be seen not addressing the same issue in my own backyard when such things are happening?
I cannot investigate my own country? Fine, if there is a rule to that effect. Otherwise I would be failing in my duty if I left out Malaysia. Hence, nobody can say that I practise selectivism. If you look at my reports, the six annual reports and my mission reports, you'll find that I have intervened in practically every country including the US, UK, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, China and India.
I have been interviewed by the media, both electronic and print, in many countries on matters pertaining to judicial independence in those countries. Recently in South Africa and Belarus. In South Africa both the minister for justice and I gave a joint press conference.
Malaysiakini: But you are not getting the kind of support in Malaysia.
Param: It doesn't matter. Sometimes, you may not be recognised in your own country. I know many people support me but publicly are afraid to do so. A lot of these things are quite common in this kind of situations and you just have to accept it.
We gained independence in 1957, but we have a long way to go and get politically matured. In recent years materialism has changed people's concept of human values. Such concept too will change. Truth and justice must in the end prevail over injustice, greed and want.
Malaysiakini: This is going to be your last term as a UN special rapporteur.
Param: Yes.
Malaysiakini: It expires in 2003. How do you see your immediate future?
Param: There is so much to be done. So many things can happen within these three years. I've already got a whole list of countries to visit on the invitation of governments. I have just finished South Africa and Belarus. I will be going to Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe and several speaking engagements in Croatia, Uganda, Australia, Belfast and New York, etc. Spreading the gospel of judicial independence and meeting the leading actors in the administration of justice all over the world is an experience in itself.
Param: I was very surprised with the government's response to the report. (Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) Datuk Rais Yatim said that he read the whole thing only on the Internet. But the government has still not answered what happened to the draft which was sent here before publication.
I am told that it was sent through the Malaysian mission in Geneva, via the International Commission on Jurists. The mission conceded that they sent it to Wisma Putra. Neither Wisma Putra nor anyone in the government said what happened to the draft. The government was given a chance to respond. The four organisations were prepared to publish the response ("[#1]Malaysian judiciary attacked by international law bodies[/#]", Apr 7).
Now, it is said the key persons were not met by the commission. Who are the key persons? The Attorney-General? He refused to see them. They wanted a meeting with him, he refused. He was a key person in the Anwar Ibrahim trial. The prime minister, in fairness to him, he was not well during that period. Some senior judges, together with the chief justice, had a five-hour meeting with them. Two meetings I was told.
Hence, what more could they expect of this mission? They did everything they could. The chief justice is saying that he never received a copy of the report earlier. Now, why can't they come out publicly and respond to the contents of the report rather than making vague accusations of bias, etc? I would rather these people accept reality. Evaluate the scenario here before things deteriorate further. They must accept the fact that there are serious problems and start working from there.
Malaysiakini: That could mean cleaning up the whole...
Param: Yes, why not? See what is happening to the judiciary in the Philippines.
Malaysiakini: Indonesia's Attorney-General Marzuki Darusman said that his country would have to sack all their judges...
Param: Yes. Marzuki and I are in a same committee. When he was chairman of the Indonesian Human Rights Commission, he gave it some teeth. And recently during the Bank Bali case, the Jakarta Post came out strongly alleging impropriety on the part of the judge who threw out the indictment.
Marzuki was reported to have said that he was going to investigate the public prosecutor, whether he took any bribe. The minister of justice also said he was going to investigate the judge, whether he took any bribe. They were openly, transparently talking about it. What is so wrong in discussing all that?
The judiciary, too, is accountable. Judges are not above the law. If they are seen misconducting, then the public must be free to express and complain. To hear such expression stifled particularly through the judicial process is beyond belief.
Judges have certain insulations. These insulations are to secure their independence. It will be an abuse of the judicial power to use these insulations to suppress or stifle exposure of any misconduct on their part.
Malaysiakini: You know Musa Hitam well. He has served a stint as chair of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. Now he is back in the hot seat again as head of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission. Can he deliver?
Param: Human rights commissions are set up in many countries today. There is a lot of pressure on governments to set up such institutions from the UN. The mere fact that such an institution is set up doesn't mean that the human rights situation in the country is going to improve overnight. Nevertheless, the success of the commission will depend largely on the commitment, the independence and the courage of the commissioners.
Malaysiakini: How do you see legislative restrictions imposed on the Human Rights Commission?
Param: Irrespective of limitations in the legislation, the commission could achieve its objectives with some creativity in addressing the issues. I have confidence in the chairman and the commissioners. We must give them time. Civil society must give it the support. The NGO community could annually evaluate the performance of the commission. Such evaluations would be a useful feedback for the commission itself. For example, the UN Human Rights Commission's performance is evaluated by international NGOs after each annual session.
Malaysiakini: The chief justice who was to retire last month was given a six months' extension. Is that because they haven't got enough people to find a replacement?
Param: I am sure if there is political will, suitable replacements could be found. The objective of this six months' extension is to enable the judge concerned to wind up and complete unfinished work like outstanding judgments. On that premise, the judge concerned, whether chief justice or not, should not hear any fresh cases during those six months.
Malaysiakini: Do the litigations you are facing affect your work?
Param: It has affected my work. I had to leave a large firm where I was actually the chief executive partner. I virtually grew with that firm for about 30 years. Came up the ladder and became the most senior partner.
Malaysiakini: Were you asked to resign?
Param: No, I was not asked to resign but with all those news reports of the suits, sometimes given headline coverage, some of my partners became jittery. You cannot possibly allow yourself to remain there and see anything adverse happening to the firm. It was a very large firm. It came up very well in the last 30 years.
We had about 60-odd lawyers and 100 over staff when I left. I just could not think of my own self interest and remain there and make it difficult for others. So the best thing to do was to part company - do what I think was right and let them continue with their practice.
Malaysiakini: Was the sacrifice worth it?
Param: Well, it's a small price to pay really. When you see the things I saw in the last six years, harassments and intimidations on lawyers and human rights defenders and attacks on judges. People sacrifice their lives for these causes. The UN and the international community have stood by me the last five years. That has been a great support. They know what I am doing and what I mean.
Malaysiakini: Would you change anything you have done, given the chance?
Param: No. Somebody asked me this question, I think the foreign press in Geneva. Whether I regret having investigated Malaysia and gotten into all this, I said, no, not the least because, when I go around the world and report about how the governments in those countries should conduct themselves to improve the judicial system, how can I be seen not addressing the same issue in my own backyard when such things are happening?
I cannot investigate my own country? Fine, if there is a rule to that effect. Otherwise I would be failing in my duty if I left out Malaysia. Hence, nobody can say that I practise selectivism. If you look at my reports, the six annual reports and my mission reports, you'll find that I have intervened in practically every country including the US, UK, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, China and India.
I have been interviewed by the media, both electronic and print, in many countries on matters pertaining to judicial independence in those countries. Recently in South Africa and Belarus. In South Africa both the minister for justice and I gave a joint press conference.
Malaysiakini: But you are not getting the kind of support in Malaysia.
Param: It doesn't matter. Sometimes, you may not be recognised in your own country. I know many people support me but publicly are afraid to do so. A lot of these things are quite common in this kind of situations and you just have to accept it.
We gained independence in 1957, but we have a long way to go and get politically matured. In recent years materialism has changed people's concept of human values. Such concept too will change. Truth and justice must in the end prevail over injustice, greed and want.
Malaysiakini: This is going to be your last term as a UN special rapporteur.
Param: Yes.
Malaysiakini: It expires in 2003. How do you see your immediate future?
Param: There is so much to be done. So many things can happen within these three years. I've already got a whole list of countries to visit on the invitation of governments. I have just finished South Africa and Belarus. I will be going to Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe and several speaking engagements in Croatia, Uganda, Australia, Belfast and New York, etc. Spreading the gospel of judicial independence and meeting the leading actors in the administration of justice all over the world is an experience in itself.
View Comments0