Last month, 28 judges, who previously served in the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court, and seven widows of former judges filed a lawsuit against the government seeking declarations that their pensions should be adjusted annually, based on the salaries of current judges.

Lawyer Iqbal Harith Liang, who is holding a watching brief for the Malaysian Bar, said High Court judge Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh proposed a settlement during case management today.

The court set March 21 as the next mention date, pending the proposed mediation.

Meanwhile, Iqbal said one of the plaintiffs — former High Court judge John Louis O’Hara — will be withdrawing from the action due to conflict of interest.

In their lawsuit, the former judges and dependents claimed that they were aggrieved by the “anomalous and unconstitutional situation” of non-adjustment of their pensions pursuant to Articles 125(7) and 125(9) of the Federal Constitution, and embodied under the Judges’ Remuneration Act.

Under the Judges’ Remuneration (Amendment of First and Fifth Schedules) Regulations 2016, the pension and other benefits of judges and judicial commissioners is adjusted annually by 2%.

“The constitutionally entrenched provisions of Section 15B of the Judges’ Remuneration Act were amended with retrospective effect to Jan 1, 2014,” they said.

They sought a declaration that the regulations are in breach of Article 125(7) of the Federal Constitution read with Article 125(9) and that their pension and benefits should be adjusted according to the current salaries and benefits of serving judges.

The plaintiffs also want the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to repeal the regulations and put in new provisions on revising the pension of retired judges.

They said they had to seek legal redress as the government had refused to entertain their notice of demand sent in September last year.

The former judges were represented by lawyers Christopher Leong and Abdullah Abdul Rahman while federal counsel M Kogilambigai appeared for the government.