When Justice Muhammad Kamil Awang declared the Likas state assembly seat in Sabah vacant, and found the assemblyman, former chief minister Yong Teck Lee, guilty of election offences, he sent shivers down the government's spine.

When he alleged that the former chief justice pressured him to dismiss the petition, it revealed what many had suspected; that undue pressure is brought on judges to give the judgement expected.

Typically, the guts of the judgement - that the electoral list is flawed, that the Elections Commission (EC) did not address the complaints, the candidate himself had committed an election offence - were conveniently ignored.

But what he said is the complaint of every opposition party over the years. The EC is unfair to them. For the first time, a judge says there is merit in those complaints.

Obiter dicta

But he is flayed for his obiter dicta: that he brought in his personal problems into the judgement. He says he did to show that if judges could be pushed around, what then the common man. Be that as it may, if the government is so horrified at this judgement - and I believe it has a good case - it should act to nullify it on the grounds of the judge's apparent bias.

It is important judicial decisions must be accepted, unless overruled. Sniping at the judge is neither here nor there. The judge, since retired, should not have elaborated on his judgement, which should have stood by itself.

He opened the floodgates against him with his press conferences and explanations. It is not his business to do so, and his judgement should be what he delivered and not his later explanations.

But the government would not leave well enough alone either. The de facto law minister, Rais Yatim, wants an appeal court for election offences. Mahathir says the judge should have come to him if he had been pressured by the former Chief Justice. But two wrongs do not make one right.

No right

Eusoff Chin should not have had any direct contact with the judge, only the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak could. Is Mahathir now saying that judges and others should bypass their superiors and go straight to him? Would he have entertained the judge considering the circumstances?

The government's discomfiture is not that the judge brought personal matters into his decision, but that the Elections Commission has shown itself to be not fair and impartial. If the Likas electoral rolls is questioned, so should that for every constituency. The opposition Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) has a long list of questionable electoral rolls it would now bring to court.

That there were calls for the by-election to be held after the electoral rolls are corrected is a sign of future problems. In any case, if Yong Teck Lee is guilty of an electoral offence in Likas, would it affect his position as the Member of Parliament for Gaya?

Since Likas is part of the Gaya parliamentary constituency, and federal elections held later than the state assembly, it should, but only if there was an election petition against that election and the seat is declared vacant.

The Chinese factor

The government acts in heat because Likas is a Chinese-majority seat, and it is worried the Nanyang Press fiasco could make the Chinese voters vote for the opposition. The Umno convention last week reflected Umno's uncertain hold on the Malay community and the Nanyang Press fiasco MCA's.

Like in Sarawak, Chinese education problems and other cultural issues put the government in some fear.

A by-election must be held in Likas. Rais Yatim thinks there should be an electoral court of appeal to prevent 'capricious' decisions which upset the government's sanguinity. More important though, to have the judicial code of ethics brought to bear upon the election judges. They should hear the appeals within months of the petitions being filed, and decisions within three months.

But why should judges be specially assigned to hear election petitions? Could not every judge hear election petitions, acting as an election judge when he does? We have incredible experience in making things more difficult than they are.

Election judges release judgements years after the election, making a mockery of the process. It must not be forgotten Justice Kamal handed down his judgement two years after the election, though by the standards of others, it is quick enough.

The Elections Commission chairman suggests that those attaining 21 are automatically registered. This would mean 500,000 new voters every year to the electoral rolls.

The government is uncertain and frightened what this forebodes. Its anger is directed at what the judgement represents, not the judge's foibles. It sees the future staring in its face and cannot cope with it.