Social media outrage and public opinion trials are posing a growing threat to judicial independence, Chief Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh has warned, urging judges to focus on delivering justice rather than seeking public approval.
Speaking at an academic lecture for law students at Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin in Kuala Terengganu today, he said the judiciary must distinguish between earning public confidence and chasing popularity.
“Our job as judges is not to be popular. Our job is to be right,” he said during his lecture on whether the judiciary could survive the court of public opinion.
Wan Ahmad Farid noted that lengthy court judgments were often reduced to screenshots and circulated online, prompting people to form strong opinions without reading the full reasoning behind the decisions.
“I would urge you, whatever the case, to read the judgment itself, including the dissent where there is one, before forming a view,” he said.
He added that courts were often praised for their independence when rulings favoured one side, but accused of being compromised when decisions went against that side.
“That is not analysis. It is pure, unadulterated partisanship at its ugliest,” he said.
However, Wan Ahmad Farid acknowledged the judiciary’s troubled history, including the 1988 judicial crisis and the 2007 “correct, correct, correct” video controversy, saying public suspicion could sometimes be justified.
He stressed that the judiciary must acknowledge its shortcomings and rebuild public trust through honest self-correction.
“An institution that cannot speak honestly about its own history cannot ask for trust,” he said.
The Chief Justice also cautioned that the fear of online backlash could influence judicial decisions, undermining independence even without direct interference.
To strengthen public confidence, he called for plain-language summaries of judgments, timely publication of court decisions, transparent complaints procedures and a credible judicial code of ethics.
While criticism of court decisions was healthy, he warned that personal attacks and attempts to portray judges as enemies could undermine respect for the judiciary.
“The court of public opinion operates on popularity and sometimes unverified data. The court of law operates on legality,” he said.
Asked whether the judiciary could survive public scrutiny, Wan Ahmad Farid gave an unequivocal answer: “Yes.”
