CO885-(11-12) — Page 627

546

JE

172.

2. The proposals for judicial reorganization in Malaya, made by Sir William Murison and Sir Lancelot Elphinstone, fall into two parts. The first is the recom- mendation that there should be one Chief Justice for Malaya, and the second is the proposal for constituting a stronger and better Appeal Court for Malaya. It will be convenient to deal with these two proposals separately.

3. As regards the proposal that one Chief Justice for Malaya should be substituted in place of one Chief Justice for the Straits Settlements and a second for the Federated Malay States, after listening to the discussion which took place, I remain convinced that Sir William Murison and Sir Lancelot Elphinstone were right in recommending this change. I am quite unable to detect any valid reason why the Federated Malay States should need a separate Chief Justice, while the Unfederated Malay States do not. The arguments of Mr. Justice Thorne and of the Federated Malay States Bar Committee have failed to impress me. Nevertheless, I think that, in existing circum- stances, it would, for political reasons, be imprudent to press this proposal until the doubts of Their Highnesses the Rulers of Selangor and Negri Sembilan have been dis- pelled. It remains, however, for consideration whether, if you consider the proposal to be sound, it would not be wise to refrain for the present from making any substantive appointment to the vacancy left in the post of Chief Justice, Federated Malay States, by the recent retirement on pension of Sir Lancelot Elphinstone. Mr. Justice Thorne is at present acting in this appointment, and he desires to take leave in February next. It can, if you so wish, be arranged that acting appointments should be made in this post, and it may be expedient to do so, because Sir William Murison, proposes to retire on pension in April next, and the views of his successor on this subject might well be awaited before a final decision is taken.

4. As regards the constitution of a stronger and better Appeal Court for Malaya, I am satisfied that this proposal ought not to be further delayed, the more so because for some time to come there will be two Chief Justices in this country. It seems to me altogether wrong that, whereas the Chief Justice of the Federated Malay States is empowered by law to sit on appeals in the Colony, the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements is not similarly empowered to sit on appeals in the Federated Malay States. I propose, therefore, to have prepared, for your consideration, an Enactment removing this disability from the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements, who is at present the only Judge of the Colony who has not the right to sit in judicial proceedings in the Federated Malay States. If the matter is properly explained to the Rulers in the Federated Malay States by their Residents, I do not think that any political objection can be taken. It is obviously desirable that in any appeal from a judgment of the Chief Justice of the Federated Malay States the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements should preside, and likewise that in any appeal from a judgment of the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements the Chief Justice of the Federated Malay States should preside. I will also arrange for the preparation of a roster of Appeal Court Judges, in order that the strongest possible court may be available for hearing appeals through- out Malaya. I may explain that the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements already sits on appeals in the Unfederated States of Johore and of Kedah, and I cannot, therefore, see any political reason why he should not likewise sit on appeals in the other Malay States as well, whether Federated or not.

5. I shall, of course, take no overt action in this matter until I hear what you decide, when you have Sir Samuel Wilson's report on this subject; but I shall cause the necessary Enactment to be prepared and forward it to you as soon as it has been drafted.

6. I am inclined to think that one of the best means of educating public opinion in the Federated Malay States to accept the principle of one Chief Justice for Malaya will be the arrangement that the Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements should sit on appeals in the Federated Malay States. Experience of such a system wi, I believe, also remove any doubts from the minds of Their Highnesses the Rulers of Selangor and Negri Sembilan as to the wisdom of such a reform. Their Highnesses the Rulers of Perak and of Pahang have already stated that they have no objection to the change. 7. Sir William Murison has read this despatch in draft and concurs in it.

I have, &c.,

C. CLEMENTI,

Governor

173

Enclosure in No. 79,

NOTE BY MR. GENT OF DISCUSSION at King's HOUSE, KUALA LUMPUR, on 26th NOVEMBER, 1932, ON PROPOSALS FOR JUDICIAL REORGANIZATION IN MALAYA.

Present:-

His Excellency the High Commissioner (Sir Cecil Clementi). Sir Samuel Wilson.

The Chief Justice, Straits Settlements (Sir William Murison).

The Acting Chief Justice, Federated Malay States (Mr. Thorne).

The Acting Chief Secretary to Government, Federated Malay States

(Mr. Caldecott).

The four Federated Malay States Residents (Messrs. Shelley, Leonard,

Hughes, and Adams).

The Legal Adviser, Federated Malay States (Mr. Gibson), and

Mr. Gent.

A--One Chief Justice for Malaya.

SIR W. MURISON explained that, in his view, the assimilation of law and procedure

in Malaya which was desirable could not be effected as long as there were separate Chief Justices for the Straits Settlements and Federated Malay States.

MR. JUSTICE THORNE explained the objections, administrative and political, which he saw to the proposed amalgamation of the posts of Chief Justice in the Straits Settlements and Federated Malay States in a single office of Chief Justice for all Malaya. The day-to-day arrangements of Courts and special sittings in the Federated Malay States could not, he thought, be satisfactorily done by a Chief Justice resident outside the Federated Malay States, even though there were to be a Senior Judge stationed in Kuala Lumpur alternating every six months with the Chief Justice in Singapore. It seemed to him that either the suppression of the separate appointment in the Federated Malay States was to be merely a change of title of the senior of the Federated Malay States Judges, or if it was to be more than that, a serious step was contemplated, which without sufficient reason ignored the special circumstances of the Federated States and the policy and experience which were responsible for the existing system. As regards assimilation of law and procedure, the differences in procedure at this stage were not great, and it was the accepted policy to assimilate them. The question of differences in enactments was a matter, as far as the Federated Malay States were concerned, for the legislature advised by the Legal Adviser, and the Chief Justice could do no more than make suggestions.

MR. CALDECOTT said that he had been in favour of Sir W. Murison's proposal as an ultimate objective, but he had come to be aware of the apprehensions entertained by the Rulers and others in the Federated Malay States, and after reading certain concep- tions stated by Sir W. Murison in his memorandum, he feared that those apprehensions would not be removed. He hoped that the proposal would be allowed to drop for the present, as he considered it would only do harm to the general policy of decen- tralization in the Federated Malay States.

SIR S. WILSON expressed his sympathy with Mr. Caldecott's view. He did not regard the question as necessarily linked with the main issue of decentralization. Mr. Thorne's arguments against the suppression of the separate post of Chief Justice in the Federated Malay States seemed to him to reflect the objections which he had heard to the abolition of the post of Chief Secretary. and he thought that if the proposals were pressed in present circumstances it was likely to jeopardize the main decentraliza- tion scheme. In due course it might be that public opinion would be brought round after experience of decentralization.

HIS EXCELLENCY concluded that in the circumstances it would be better not to press the proposal for the present.

B.-Appeal Court for Malaya.

MR. THORNE expressed himself as supporting in principle the proposal to create a single Court for Malaya, but he differed from Sir W. Murison as to the method of bringing it into effect. In his view no elaborate legislative or other changes were needed it was only necessary to draw up a roster of judges who shall be vested by the several authorities in the Peninsula with the authority to sit as Judges of Appeal in the Colony and in each of the Malay States. If it were proposed that the Chief Justice, Straits Settlements, should sit on appeals in the Federated Malay States, "an enactment for that purpose would be required.

PUBLIC RECORD

Is de la le li

OFFICE

Reference

C.O.882/12

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE AF REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO