Naran Singh said in other countries, especially those in the Commonwealth, senior lawyers were made judges due to their standing among the legal fraternity.

“At that age, the judges would have accumulated the legal experience and maturity in delivering sound decisions,” he told FMT.

Naran said this in response to out-going Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria’s proposal that the retirement age of judges be raised to at least 70 as life expectancy had gone up. Currently, judges retire at the mandatory age of 66.

The criminal lawyer from Ipoh said he was supportive of Arifin’s suggestion but was not amenable to candidates being appointed judicial commissioners (JCs) when they were younger than 55.

Naran said relatively young candidates were made probation judges in the last two exercises to appoint JCs. They can later be elevated to judges to the High Court.

Article 123 of the Federal Constitution states a citizen can be appointed a judge if the candidate had been a government lawyer or in private practice for at least 10 years.

Naran said the entry age could be raised as unlike the early years of independence, the Judicial Appointments Commission now had a wide pool of lawyers to select its judicial officers.

Arifin said judges in neighbouring countries, such as Singapore, the Philippines and Indonesia, retired when they were aged 70 to 75.

He said Federal Court judges in the United States remained in office as long as they were physically and mentally healthy. “We need not go to that extreme but it is sufficient that the retirement age here is raised to 70.”

Former law minister Rais Yatim, who last year suggested extending the retirement age of judges, said a judge might not have the adrenaline surges of a younger person, but “it is the dexterity, wisdom and brainpower that we want”.