His lawyer, Joy Wilson Appukuttan, said Hamid has also been asked to give an explanation in respect to a recent judgment he delivered in a criminal appeal involving Nigerians Aluma Mark Chinoso and Anyim Daniel Ikechukwu.
Hamid, who led a three-member bench, remarked, among others, in a 101-page judgment that the judiciary is expected to act as check and balance on the executive and legislature as provided for under the Federal Constitution.
The senior judge, who is scheduled to retire next year, said the court should ensure the constitution was not amended against the interest of the public and the fundamental liberty provisions were not made illusory by way of legislation.
Wilson said the notice was issued last Tuesday by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat in her capacity as chairman of the Judges’ Ethics Committee.
“I will be replying to the notice within the 30-day period,” he said.
FMT understands that this is the first time a show cause notice has been issued to a judge since a code of ethics was drawn up in 2009.
Those who violate the code could be given a warning or suspension or the chief justice could propose to the prime minister that the king set up a tribunal to remove the judge.
Exactly two years ago, Hamid revealed at an international law conference that he was reprimanded by a top judge for delivering a dissenting judgment in the widely followed unilateral conversion case of M Indira Gandhi in 2016.
He had upheld the High Court ruling in Indira’s case while the majority (of two) set aside the decision.
The Federal Court unanimously decided for the mother that such conversion is unconstitutional without the permission of the non-Muslim spouse.
Hamid reportedly told lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla that there was interference in the outcome of Karpal’s sedition appeal, alleging judicial interference by a senior judge.
However, he did not reveal the identity of the judges in both cases.
In January last year, Karpal’s daughter, Sangeet Kaur Deo, filed a suit against the office of the chief justice for failure to defend and preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
At that time, the top judge was Richard Malanjum, and Tengku Maimun was appointed to the position from May 2 last year.
A month later, Hamid affirmed an explosive affidavit alleging that senior judges had intervened in the decisions of numerous appeals, including Karpal’s sedition appeal.
In October last year, High Court judge Mohd Firuz Jaffril threw out the suit, saying it was no longer sustainable as the Federal Court had acquitted Karpal of the charge in May 2018.
“The originating summons is academic as Karpal’s case is no longer a live issue,” Firuz said.
Firuz also allowed the chief justice’s application to remove almost all the contents of Hamid’s affidavit in support of Sangeet’s suit.
The judge said the affidavit was scandalous, vexatious and frivolous and that some of the averments in the document were hearsay.
Sangeet has filed an appeal.