Lawyer Bastian Vendargon, appearing for Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, said judge Mariana Yahya set the date for the decision after hearing arguments from them and the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), which is representing the Judges Ethics Committee, in chambers.
Co-counsel Joy Wilson Appukuttan said the court extended a temporary stay on the tribunal hearing until the decision is delivered.
Senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi, representing the tribunal, contended that Hamid’s bid to start the judicial review is “premature” as he had yet to appear before the tribunal.
The tribunal was originally scheduled to hear the accusations against Hamid on Oct 22 but this was postponed to Nov 25. However, an interim stay was granted by Mariana on Nov 12.
The committee had hauled up Hamid to appear before them after complaints were lodged against him by two fellow judges.
“The applicant (Hamid) has not been found breaching the Ethics Code. The tribunal may even dismiss the complaints against him if they find the breach is not proven,” Hanir said.
He said it was an abuse of court process by Hamid to question the tribunal’s refusal to hold an open proceeding to hear his case.
“The said decision on the closed-door hearing was according to the law,” Hanir said.
Vendargon said they argued that the tribunal had exceeded its power and breached the principle of natural justice when it decided to call the inquiry against Hamid.
“Some of the tribunal’s members were judges who sat in Sodomy 2 and Karpal Singh’s cases, which have direct nexus to the complaint in his affidavit.
“They drafted charges that went far beyond the two original complaints,” he said.
Hamid is seeking to quash the committee’s decision to hold his inquiry through in-camera proceedings, adding that the inquiry should be held in an open forum.
He also wanted a declaration that the charges against him were null and void as the committee had acted unconstitutionally in preparing the charges.
At an international conference in Kuala Lumpur two years ago, Hamid had alleged that there had been judicial interference in several high-profile cases.
It led to a suit against the chief justice early last year by lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo, accusing the top judge of failing to defend and preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
The committee then issued Hamid a show cause notice over the affidavit and a judgment of a drug case.
Hamid, among other things, had said in the judgment that the judiciary was expected to act as a check and balance on the executive and legislature, as provided for under the Federal Constitution.
On Sept 8, Hamid replied to the show cause notice, which sources told FMT was quite explosive, where the judge stood by the entire contents of the affidavit and also a 101-page judgment that he delivered in early June.