“She says there is political interference. If so, when? Show us proof,” Nazri told FMT in an interview.

Tengku Maimun will retire on reaching the mandatory retirement age of 66 on June 30, unless the Yang di-Pertuan Agong extends her tenure by up to six months as permitted by the constitution.

On April 8, when delivering the keynote address at the 24th Commonwealth Law Conference in Malta, Tengku Maimun called for the prime minister to no longer have a role in judicial appointments.

She said this would reinforce the impartiality of the process and ensure appointments are merit-based and free from political influence.

However, Nazri defended the current system, saying it was based on long-standing British legal conventions which were incorporated into the Federal Constitution during independence with input from legal experts.

“We follow the convention under the UK system, where the appointment of judges is done by the king, on the advice of the prime minister. This has been practised for decades,” he said.

In 2009, the system was further enhanced through the creation of the Judicial Appointments Commission to promote transparency in the appointment process.

“Tengku Maimun was appointed under the same system. She accepted it without issue. So why is she now saying it’s not okay just as she’s about to retire?”

Malaysia’s judiciary has been under scrutiny since the 1988 constitutional crisis that saw then lord president Salleh Abas dismissed from office when Barisan Nasional, then led by Dr Mahathir Mohamad, was in power.

Tengku Maimun was appointed to lead the judiciary in 2019 after Mahathir became prime minister for a second time, this time as head of the Pakatan Harapan government.

Nazri, who last served the country as Malaysia’s ambassador to the US, said the appointments process was much worse during Mahathir’s first spell in office which ran from 1981 to 2003.

“She has to remember her name was given (to the king) by Mahathir,” he said.

Nazri said current prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, then the opposition leader, supported the formation of the commission.

At the time, Anwar said the system being introduced was the best available as it involved a mix of sitting judges and other eminent persons, including retired judges and Bar Council members.

“It involves many stakeholders who could propose anyone they see fit. I supported it because I believed in it,” said Nazri.

He said that under the JAC Act 2009, a list of candidates for the top four posts in the judiciary and all vacancies on the benches of the superior courts would be submitted to the prime minister for consideration.

However, the law does not oblige the prime minister to accept every name proposed, he said.

“The JAC gives its recommendations, but the final say lies with the king, on the advice of the prime minister,” said Nazri, who tabled the JAC Bill which was passed into law by Parliament.

“The prime minister is elected by the people. He must be given the space to decide on the names (of candidates for appointment). Unlike the chief justice, who does not represent the people, he has the people’s mandate.”

Anwar has never interfered

Nazri said Anwar has never interfered in any case pending before the judiciary.

He cited the ongoing Semantan land case which saw the High Court issue an adverse ruling against Putrajaya last year as clear proof of non-interference by the government in the administration of justice.

The case involved a long-standing dispute between Semantan Estate Sdn Bhd and the government over 106ha of land in Mukim Batu known as the “Duta enclave”.

Semantan Estate claims the land was acquired by the federal government in 1956 at an undervalue.

On Aug 7 last year, the High Court ordered the Kuala Lumpur land registrar to transfer the land, said to be valued at RM12 billion presently, back to Semantan Estate following a botched acquisition.

The case is now in the Court of Appeal, which will deliver its decision on the government’s appeal against the High Court ruling on June 24.

“The prime minister could call the judiciary to say don’t be harsh on the government. If there was interference, why would judges rule against the government?”

Nazri also cited the criminal cases brought against former prime minister Najib Razak. He said Anwar never interfered to prevent Najib’s conviction or imprisonment despite the former prime minister’s political ties.

“If Anwar interfered, Najib wouldn’t be in jail. The court sentenced him. The pardons board reviewed his case. Where is the interference?”

Don’t attack PM based on perceptions

Nazri expressed shock at Tengku Maimun’s comments, especially since they were made at an international event held overseas while she was still in office.

“She is still a sitting chief justice. She should not make political remarks, especially outside the country. She should wait until she retires if she wants to speak,” he said.

He urged the authorities to investigate her statements to see if they are unfounded.

“You cannot attack the prime minister based on perceptions. You must have facts. That’s the role of a judge—to decide based on evidence. I am shocked by her statement because she has been good in upholding justice,” he said.

He also questioned the timing of her remarks, suggesting they could be tied to her impending retirement.

“Usually, the term of the chief justice is extended by at least six months. Hers wasn’t. Maybe that’s why she’s unhappy.”

He reminded Tengku Maimun that she is herself obliged to honour the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive.

“When you’re the chief justice, your duty is to interpret the law, not make policy. Don’t get involved in politics.”