PUTRAJAYA (Feb 19): Former Chief Justice Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad has passed away at the age of 83.
His family announced his sudden passing.
Abdul Hamid, who was from Penang, served as the country’s CJ from 2007 to 2008, succeeding Tun Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Halim.
Funeral prayers will be held after Asar at Musolla Taman Selatan, Precinct 20, Putrajaya, and he will be laid to rest at the Islamic cemetery in Precinct 20, Putrajaya.
Upon his retirement, Abdul Hamid started a blog to share his legal judgements and opinions with the public, covering court cases, the judiciary and politics.
Chief Justice Datuk Seri Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, on behalf of the judiciary, offered his condolences to Abdul Hamid’s family following his passing on Thursday.
“The late Abdul Hamid was CJ from Nov 1, 2007 to Oct 17, 2008. He has contributed a lot to the Malaysian judiciary in his service. His sudden death is a loss felt by the judiciary and the country,” Wan Ahmad Farid said.
A distinguished jurist and prolific writer
Abdul Hamid’s successor Tun Zaki Azmi, when contacted for comments, described Abdul Hamid as an old friend and a respected boss.
“He was a great jurist, a very fair judge, a prolific writer who holds no bar when expressing his honest views in law and politics.
“Even when bedridden, he was still writing and publicly expressing his views. His judgements are written in simple words and easy to understand. A big loss to the legal world,” Zaki said.
Another former CJ, Tun Arifin Zakaria, also described Abdul Hamid’s demise as a huge loss as he described his relationship with Abdul Hamid as being long and cordial.
“I began to work with him in 1976, when I was the deputy registrar of the Federal Court, and he was the head of the department. He was kind but stern and would work with full dedication.
“Hence, when he was CJ, he introduced the slogan 'buat kerja' (focus on the job at hand) in all courts to emphasise to court staff and judges to do their task at hand with justice and dedication. That is his motto in his life. He is someone who should be exemplified by any officer or judges.”
Arifin said Abdul Hamid’s appointment in 2007 had brought a fresh impetus to the judiciary and resulted in the return of trust to the judiciary.
“His love for the judiciary remained after his retirement as he continued to air his views on many issues including the law and his jottings are awaited by lawyers and the public. Besides this, he was always invited to give talks on the law and the constitution. His contributions to the country’s legal world could be seen from the number of judgements he wrote as a judge,” Arifin said, adding that his passing would be felt by the legal fraternity and the judiciary.
Another former CJ, Tun Md Raus Sharif, said Abdul Hamid had the ability to make difficult things seem easy.
“His judgements and articles are closely examined, and the sentences he uses are short and written in simple language. His instructions to his subordinate officers are also straightforward — simply to do their job,” Md Raus said.
Past judgements
In 2004, Abdul Hamid led the Federal Court in a majority decision that acquitted Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is now the prime minister, of his first sodomy charge.
He, along with Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud, formed the majority that held the sodomy conviction was unsafe, while Rahmah Hussein was in the minority.
In 2008, Abdul Hamid led the Federal Court in the landmark Sabah Government vs Petrojasa Sdn Bhd case. He ordered the Sabah Government to pay RM6.56 million to Petrojasa and issued a mandamus order (to compel) to ensure the state met its legal obligation.
At that time, the court faced challenges regarding Section 44(1) of the Specific Relief Act, which held that an order of mandamus can be issued to “a person holding a public office”.
Although Abdul Hamid ruled that the Sabah Government did not qualify as “a person holding a public office” under Section 44(1) of the Specific Relief Act, the court overcame this by using its powers under Section 25(2) of the Courts of Judicature Act (CJA) 1964 to grant the remedy.
Section 25(2) of the CJA gives the High Court additional powers, specifically for judicial review, allowing it to issue prerogative orders (mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, quo warranto) and other directions, such as extending the time for proceedings, to overcome obstacles and enforce judgements.
The Petrojasa case is still often cited in judicial review proceedings till today.