Hamid Sultan Abu Backer said after that case, he was not assigned to hear cases related to the Federal Constitution and public interest matters.
“Immediately after the judgment was released to the public, a top judge called up the entire Coram and severely reprimanded me, alleging, inter alia, judicial activism, and not only that, he started throwing tantrums at me in an uncivilised manner,” he said.
However, he did not reveal the identity of the judge.
Hamid was one of the speakers on the topic of “Judiciary as the Principal Guardian of the Rule of Law” at the conference held at a hotel here.
The judge delivered a dissenting judgment in upholding the ruling of a High Court in Ipoh where kindergarten teacher M Indira Gandhi had sought to nullify the conversion certificates of her three minor children.
Early this year, a five-member Federal Court bench affirmed Hamid’s finding and allowed Indira’s appeal.
The bench ruled that the permission of a non-Muslim spouse is needed when the other spouse who embraces Islam wants to convert their minor children.
Hamid said: “I personally thought that the judgment was my greatest gift to the Malaysian public in terms of the jurisprudence related to constitutional law, oath of office and the role of the four pillars of the Federal Constitution.”
Hamid said he stood his ground and responded to the judge that he did not have to defend his judgment and would not be cowed to act against his oath of office.
“This incident created a long-term strained relationship with that judge and many more,” he added.
Hamid said he took a strong view that without a judiciary committed to judicial dynamism, the rule of law would be meaningless and corruption as well as kleptocracy could not be arrested.
He said cosmetic changes to the judiciary might not be a constitutional solution to a judiciary which was perceived to have demonstrated judicial interference as well as judicial rowdyism.
“On the face of such perceived allegations it will be prudent for the Bar Council to move a resolution for the setting up of a royal commission to once and for all address these negative perceptions that have afflicted the judiciary,” he said.
Retired judge Gopal Sri Ram said judges were not lawmakers in the real sense but merely interpreted the law.
“But that interpretation has legal consequences and that is lawmaking,” he said.
He said there were some current judges who delivered forward looking judgments while others were regressive.
Sri Ram said those who were competent and had integrity should be appointed judges or else the results would be disastrous.
Civil courts have the power, say judges as top court quashes conversion certs