Tugas hakim buat keputusan betul, bukan kejar populariti, kata ketua hakim negara

Ketua Hakim Negara Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh memohon masyarakat untuk mengeksar sistem penghakiman sendiri sebelum membuat pemeriksaan. (Picture from Facebook) In Malaysia, the anger on social media and public opinions are threatening judicial independence, said the Chief Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, urging judges to prioritize upholding justice over popular support.

He stressed that the judiciary must distinguish between public belief, which is earned, and public sentiment, which should not be sought. “Our duty as judges is not to be popular. Our responsibility is to make the right decision,” he said in an academic address at the University of Sultan Zainal Abidin, Kuala Terengganu, about the judiciary's ability to handle public opinion trials.

He said, long-winded judgments are often summarized to capture a headline and spread online, prompting people to jump to conclusions without reading the full court reasoning. “I urge you, whatever the case, read the judgment yourself including the reasoning behind it if there is any, before forming any opinion,” he said. He noted that the courts are often praised for being independent when they favor one party, but accused of losing their integrity when the opposite is done.

“That is not analysis. That is the tendency of those who go too far, no doubt. At all,” he warned. He also appealed to the black episode of the judiciary, including the 1988 crisis and the 2007 "right, right, right" video controversy, acknowledging that society's suspicions can sometimes be a catalyst. The judiciary must acknowledge its shortcomings and rebuild public trust through honest self-criticism and frank reparation.

"An institution that fails to be honest about its history is not worthy of trust," he said. He warned that concerns about public criticism can affect a judge's decision, even without direct interference. In this regard, he urged the provision of short summaries of judgments in simple language, timely publication, clear application procedures, and an ethical code of conduct for judges.

Criticism of judgments is a healthy practice, he said, but personal attacks and attempts to undermine individual judges can damage respect for the institution. “Public opinion trials depend on popularity and sometimes inaccurate information. The legal system, on the other hand, relies on solid laws,” he said. When asked if the judiciary could withstand public scrutiny, he answered firmly: “Yes.”