The Greatest Judges of All Time: the Titans who defied history

When history called, eleven judges answered: “Here I stand.” From Atkin’s neighbour principle to Dixon’s legalism, from Solomon’s wisdom to Bao Zheng’s integrity, from Abu Hanifa’s reasoning to Ginsburg’s equality crusade—these titans of justice dared to choose courage over comfort, principle over precedent. Their legacy lives in every courtroom where fairness still matters—proof that law can be humanity’s greatest tool for justice.

Read More

Could the King – or the Pardons Board – insert an Addendum into a Pardon?

The answer is, No. Why? Since the Najib saga began, the Addendum has been, in Churchill’s words, “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”. In my opinion, the key reasons are: [1]: Pardons cannot be granted ‘in instalments’. [2]: Accepted rules of constitutional interpretation do not at all point to any 'House Arrest' orders (a new Act of parliament is required for that!); and no precedent exists. [3]: ...

Read More

Which is supreme: the Constitution, the monarchy or some other power?

A Ruler's power to appoint a Chief Minister is all the rage. A blogger once wrote that the monarch could appoint his gardener as prime minister. Was he right? This minor question begets larger ones. For a start, (1) Is there a legal principle higher than the Constitution? (2) How should the Constitution be interpreted?

Read More

The deathly silence of dissent in our courts…

Dissent means disagreement between judges.  In a case comprising, say 3 judges, a dissent occurs when one judge distances himself or herself from the other 2 on grounds of legal principle. A dissent is not without its uses.  It may limit the majority decision in some way.  Or the dissent may bear a seed of a wonderful legal point waiting to germinate at some future time. A brilliant lawyer will water ...

Read More