Opinion: Even if Anwar is infringing Judicial Integrity, He’s only infringing what was already infringed
16 Jul 2025 • 7:00 AM MYT
TheRealNehruism
Writer. Seeker. Teacher
Image credit : The Rakyat Post
For the past couple of weeks – probably since Tengku Maimun’s tenure as the Chief Judge of the country ended earlier this month – the talk about how the “judicial integrity and independence” of the country has been compromised has been raging, at least amongst some segments of society.
Honestly speaking, I think the issue is mostly raging amongst a segment of society that comprises the likes of politicians, highbrow media, lawyers, political analysts and academics.
A lecturer I met last week was livid about the subject – a professor I know keeps forwarding me doomsday messages about how Anwar’s days are numbered because of the issue, day after day – but when I asked anybody else, like two restaurant owners I met a couple of days ago, none of them even knew that the issue was raging on, much less cared about it.
Now what is this issue about “judicial integrity and independence,” you may ask, that is causing the likes of Rafizi Ramli to rebel against his own party and the Bar Council to organise a “Walk for Justice” this Monday?
Well, to put it simply, I will just ask you to accept that there is something called “judicial integrity and independence,” and it is an important component of something called the judiciary, because without it, the judiciary will just be reduced to a bunch of people who wear an odd-looking costume, instead of an institution that upholds the nation.
Now we all call ourselves Malaysians – and the reason we call ourselves Malaysians is because there is a thing called Malaysia – and this thing called Malaysia is made of certain concepts, institutions and symbols – like the border, the flag, the national song, the constitution, and yes, also the judiciary.
As a matter of fact, the judiciary, along with the royalty, the parliament and the executive, like the four legs of a chair, are the main institutions that uphold the country.
When “judicial independence and integrity” is compromised, you can think of it as one of the legs of a chair called Malaysia being weakened or undermined. When it is weakened, the concept of Malaysia itself becomes weakened and undermined and when the concept of Malaysia is weakened and undermined, theoretically at least, our identity as Malaysians will also likely be weakened and undermined – although I doubt that, practically speaking, 99 percent of Malaysians see it this way.
Now who is it that everybody from Rafizi to the Bar Council to my professor and lecturer friends are blaming for weakening the chair that we call Malaysia?
Well, I will just reply to the question in one word – Anwar.
None of them are saying it out loud and clearly, of course – instead they are just speaking about it euphemistically and in a roundabout fashion by saying that they are upset about the “state of judicial integrity and independence in the country” or they are disappointed that the promise of institutional reform made by the government is not being met - but I will go out on a limb and say that what they actually mean is that they suspect that Anwar is purposely weakening judicial integrity and independence, and they want him to stop.
As to why they are all accusing or suspecting Anwar of trying to weaken “judicial independence and integrity,” I will just explain it simply by saying that they think Anwar is doing it because it benefits Anwar to do so. The weaker the judicial independence and integrity, the stronger Anwar’s power and position become. The strengthening of Anwar’s power and position is making a lot of people feel that he is becoming a dictator, and a big part of why they are so opposed to Anwar impinging on judicial integrity and independence is because they don’t want him to be a dictator.
Is there any truth to their claim that Anwar is impinging on judicial integrity and independence and trying to be a dictator?
If you ask me about the dictator part, I have long said that if Anwar is going to institute the reforms that he says he wants to institute, he will at some point have to assume dictatorial powers. I honestly don’t think that reform can be carried out in the country via democratic means, and I have been saying this in multiple articles in the last last two years.
This being the case, I suppose when people like Rafizi or my friends in academia are saying that Anwar is acting like a dictator, I am not exactly surprised.
If you were to ask me, however, whether their specific accusation that Anwar is trying to consolidate dictatorial power by interfering in the matter of the appointment of top judges in a way that severely compromises “judicial integrity and independence,” the answer is a little trickier.
You see, I think that our judicial integrity and independence has been compromised since 1988 itself, when the then Lord President of the Supreme Court, Tun Salleh Abas, was sacked from his post, and the status of the judge and the courts was reduced when the title “Lord President” and “Supreme Court” was changed to the less prestigious-sounding “Chief Judge” and “Federal Court.”
Since Tun Salleh Abas’s removal, other cases – like the widely panned trial of Anwar Ibrahim in the late 90s, as well as the VK Lingam scandal in 2008 – suggest that judicial integrity and independence have been eroded for the past 30 years, in light of the high influence that external parties have been able to exert over the judiciary.
Considering that the allegation of judicial independence and integrity has been on going continuously since 1988, I can only say that if it is indeed true that Anwar is infringing on judicial independence and integrity today, as he is being accused of, he is probably only guilty of infringing on something that was most likely already infringed way before he came into the picture.
To tell you the truth, the accusation that Anwar is infringing on the independence and integrity of the judiciary reminds me of the story of Arjuna killing Karna in the epic Mahabharata.
After Arjuna had killed Karna in the battlefield of Kurukshetra, he would find to his horror that Karna was actually his elder brother. Unable to accept the fact that he had killed his own elder brother, Arjuna would lament his deeds to Krishna.
Now in the Mahabharata, Krishna – who is depicted as god in human form – would dismiss Arjuna’s guilt by saying that just because he put an arrow through Karna, it was not him who had killed Karna.
Karna, Krishna would say, was long dead even before he stepped into the battlefield to confront Arjuna.
He was killed first by his teacher, who cursed him that he would not be able to fully utilise his skills when he needed them the most.
After that, he was also killed by the curse of a priest, who said that his chariot would be stuck in the mud in the heat of battle.
Then, he was also killed by the driver of his chariot, who kept demotivating him throughout his battle with Arjuna.
Lastly, he was also killed by his own mother, who extracted from him a promise severely limited his ability to use his full powers in the battlefield.
Karna, Krishna would say, was already three-quarters dead before he met Arjuna in the battlefield. If Arjuna had killed him at all, he had merely killed a man that was already dead.
Likewise, even if it is true that Anwar is now shooting an arrow into the heart of judicial independence, as his critics allege, it’s important to realise the patient was already on life support way before Anwar had even strung his bow.
The integrity and independence of the judiciary was first infringed more than 30 years ago, when Tun Salleh Abas was sacked.
All the lawyers and judicial officers infringed it further when they accepted the infringement with a half-baked protest, and perhaps even gave it a silent consent by shrugging their shoulders about it after a while, and going back to work as usual.
Incidents like Anwar’s sham trial in the late 90s infringed it even further.
The VK Lingam scandal further infringed it in 2007.
After being infringed by all these incidents, if Anwar can stand accused of infringing on judicial integrity and independence today, to be fair, we have to accept that all he is doing is infringing on something that has long been infringed beforehand.
***
kt comments:
On matey Nehru saying Anwar is just merely continuing the undermining of the already much-undermined Judiciary (which started in 1988), it reminds me of my late Mum's lesson to me - that usually would start off with a mighty slap from her on poor delicate kaytee's sweet cherubic rosy red cheek (made rosy red perhaps because the slap, wakakaka) which was then followed by her Mummy's axiom, namely: "If others eat sh*t, would you also want to eat sh*t?" wakakaka.
NO matey, Anwar has no right to continue to undermine the already-badly battered Judiciary - instead Anwar should strive to restore the Judiciary to its former pre-1988 glory, dignity and respect.
On another issue, that of Karna, Arjuna and Vishnu, let me give my version at great temerity to matey Nehru, a Hindu - I apologise in advance:
| Karna in the Mahabharata was loyal to his friend Duryodhana of the Kauravas and more importantly to his adoptive parents Radha and Adhiratha who raised him with love, while spurning the offer to recognise Kunti his birth mother and Queen Mother to become king of the Pandavas Wikipedia tells us: Karna says that though he may have been the firstborn [of Kunti], he never received the affection or care from her as the firstborn. "You discarded me", says Karna to Kunti, "you destroyed me in a way that no enemy could ever do to him". It is too late. He reiterates that he loves the parents who raised him, they love him, and he will remain loyal to his lifelong relationships. No one should abandon those who give respect and affection, says Karna in these Mahabharata verses. The war momentum shall continue and he aims to kill Arjuna [his half-brother]. Karna promised to Kunti that he will not kill any of his other four half-brothers, but either "Arjuna or I" shall die and she can still say she has five sons just as she did all her life. After these developments and pondering on Karna's life choices, the divine Krishna, as well as a host of Mahabharata heroes, in private and after his death, honor Karna as a satpurusha (lit. "a true, honest, good man") and "the best among those who understand and uphold the dharma" |
 |
above - Arjuna killing Karna in what would be considered as a war crime today As promised to [his birthmother] Kunti, Karna used a celestial weapon only once against Arjuna [his half brother]. Regaining the upper hand, Karna has a chance to kill Arjuna but spares the latter as the sun was about to set. It was said that Lord Krishna [who greatly favoured Arjuna and rode with him into war] realized that only miracles can save his ward Arjuna from death, thus Krishna caused the Sun to set prematurely. Lord Krishna then made plans to kill Karna by cheating. He revealed his plan to Arjuna, saying there will come a time where Karna would be defenseless and unarmed; that was the time for Arjuna to strike. Though it was against the code of war to attack a weaponless man tending to a chariot wheel stuck in the mud, Arjuna did not hesitate to kill Karna at the latter's most vulnerable moment - all at the urging of a biased Lord Krishnan in what would be a 'war crime' today or an unchivalrous act in the Mahabharata ******** Yes, it's also true that there were Three curses against Karna that led to his death in Mahabharat Three curses against Karna given to him by his guru Parashurama, a Brahmin and by Mother Earth that led to his defeat to Arjuna. Also, it leads it his death during the battle in Mahabharat. The three curses were: 1. Curse by Mother Earth: Karna once helped a little girl who has accidentally dropped a jar filled with milk (or ghee) on the ground. She feared punishment from her mother A kind Karna helped the girl recover the milk by squeezing and twisting the ground. In short, by hurting Mother Earth herself Pain is so unbearable (असहनीय), that Mother Earth curses Karna that she would not help Karna during the battle when he needs her the most. Also, she will try to make him even weaker in the battle. This curse (अभिशाप) of Karna came into effect during his battle with Arjuna. It results in an untimely (बेवक़्त) incident when the wheel of his Chariot (रथ) stuck in the mud (मिटटी) during the battle 2. Curse by Parashurama: Karna is interested in the art of warfare (युद्ध कला). To learn it, he approaches Dronacharya. But he being caste-conscious refuses to teach him as he was not a Kshatriya (traditionally military or ruling class). After refused by Dronacharya, he decided to learn this art of warfare from Parashurama. Parashurama is the guru of Dronacharya. But there is one problem. The problem is that Parashurama only teaches Brahmins and Karna is not a Brahmin either. Thus, Karna presents himself before Parashurama as a Brahmin without revealing his true identity. Parashurama accepts him as his student. He trained him to the point that he declared Karna to be equal to himself in the art of warfare and archery. One day after training, Karna offers his lap to his guru Parashurama so that he could rest and take a nap. While Parashurama is sleeping, a bee stung (डंक मरना) Karna’s thigh (जांघ). But Karna did not move as he does not want to disturb his guru In some versions, it is stated that Lord Indra take the form of a bee and stung Karna’s thigh in order to benefit his son Arjuna [Indra sired Arjuna] When Parashurama wake up, he saw the blood coming out from Karna’s wound (घाव). He immediately figures out that Karna is not a Brahmin. He knows that a Brahmin is not able to bear the pain for so long. Thus an angry [and caste-conscious] Parashurama curses Karna: Parashurama becomes angry with Karna and accuses him of stealing knowledge by not telling him that he is not a Brahmin He curses Karna that he would forget all his knowledge required to use the Brahmanda Astra (weapon). After hearing this, Karna becomes very sad and feels guilty for his offence. He pleads Parashurama to take back his curse. Upon Karna’s pleading, Parashurama modifies his curse. He says to Karna that “You will only forget all your knowledge when you need it the most while fighting against an equal enemy. Due to Karna’s diligence (लगन), he gave him his personal celestial weapon “Bhargavastra” and his personal bow (धनुष) “Vijaya“ This curse also came into effect during his battle with Arjuna. This happens during his last day on the battlefield when he forgets the chant (or mantra) to invoke (आह्वान करना) the “Brahmanda Astra“. 3. Curse of Brahmin: Once Karna is practising his archery (तीरंदाजी) skills with his bow and arrow. Accidentally, he kills cow of a Brahmin. The Brahmin got angry and curses him that he will be killed by his enemy when his attention is diverted in the middle of a combat This curse also came into effect during his battle with Arjuna when Karna is busy removing the chariot wheel from the mud. During this time, he is shot by Arjuna, on the advice of Krishna This is how three curses of Karna led to his death in Mahabharat Such was the sad lot of Karna in a caste-conscious society |
No comments:
Post a Comment