By TAN SRI LEE LAM THYE
KOTA KINABALU: Malaysia is abuzz with speculation as to why the Chief Justice has not been named despite the fact that the previous Chief Justice had retired a few days ago.
Although the law allows for her tenure to be extended, no such move was made. Instead, we now have an Acting Chief Justice—without any official explanation as to why the top judicial post remains vacant.
The Chief Justice is not a ceremonial role.
It carries immense responsibility in safeguarding judicial independence.
This is not a minor administrative matter. The Chief Justice plays a critical role in upholding the rule of law, steering institutional reform, and symbolising the independence of the judiciary.
Leaving that post in limbo, even temporarily, undermines public confidence in one of the country’s most vital institutions.
The retirement date was known well in advance, and there was ample time to identify and appoint a successor.
The lack of transparency behind the delay inevitably fuels speculation—whether of political interference, internal disagreement, or hesitation at the highest levels.
In constitutional democracies, perception is important.
An Acting CJ, no matter how capable, may lack the authority or decisiveness of a permanent appointee—especially on matters requiring bold institutional leadership.
This episode risks setting an unhealthy precedent.
Future appointments may become vulnerable to similar delays or strategic manoeuvrings.
At stake is not just a post, but the credibility of our judicial system.
A swift, transparent appointment is needed—not just to restore certainty, but to reaffirm that the independence of the judiciary remains intact and above suspicion.
The silence of the authorities teaches the younger generation that when something unjust or irregular happens, it is normal to look away and remain silent.
At a time when young Malaysians are urged to believe in reform, good governance, and the rule of law, this kind of leadership vacuum sends the opposite message.
