RECENTLY, the chief justice and attorney-general were caught in a mini political storm for doing the twist during an event to mark the opening of the new legal year.

A now-viral video taken at the dinner and dance, organised by the Sabah Law Society for the opening of the new Legal Year, showed the two senior members of the legal fraternity dancing with their counterparts and juniors casually.

Questions were raised about the appropriateness of such mingling and if it was conduct becoming of such members in the first place. There are multiple layers to the question, as are the suggestions implied. 

The first question that should arise is if what transpired was wrong, in the first place. And what type or degree of wrong was it, a moral wrong, an ethical or professional one, or a legal wrong?

A moral wrong would mean different things to different people, as it is a standard or principle one upholds by one’s self, either by a personal conviction, guided by a religious belief, or adhering to a voluntary standard that a person undertakes to guard.

But this should not be imposed on others who do not subscribe to those beliefs. A person who does a moral wrong should answer to his or her Maker, and otherwise, face little more than the prospect of disappointing people who have held them to that standard.

An ethical wrong usually holds more persuasive sway, as it betrays a more common, generally and universally accepted code of conduct that comes with an office, a position in society or a professional appointment.

A professional wrong would be misconduct against either accepted norms in a profession or a transgression against guidelines or rules governing that profession, the latter of which could result in expulsion from such a body or withdrawal of rights from professing that vocation.

The next question that should arise is, what exactly did detractors take issue with – the event itself, the A-G and CJ dancing, or the both of them dancing on the same stage?

Opening of the Legal Year is a tradition in many common law jurisdictions (countries that inherited/ follows the English system) within the fraternity, which is aimed to bring together leaders, members of the local judiciary, A-G’s Chambers and Bar to raise issues of common concern, and to celebrate a new chapter in that country’s legal history and growth. 

For example, at the Brunei event this year, their CJ, Steven Chong, called upon the judiciary, legal practitioners both private and public and the A-G’s Chambers to ponder on previous years’ works and to constructively engage each other.

Engagement is a big part and parcel of these events, so much so the Bar Council last year, declined the court’s invitation simply because the then chief justice did not allocate slots for the A-G and Bar Council chairman to speak.

As such, the question of A-G and CJ sharing a stage or being seen together should not arise, as that would seem like the point of the event.

If the event itself is an issue now, it should have been an issue since its inception or its adoption into Malaysia.

If it is the social intermingling, then one should ask is it a moral reason, in that dancing is now seen as improper, or is it an activity that is to be frowned upon like excessive drinking, or having affairs, and if this is a fair imposition on member of the judiciary. 

While it is true that having unquestionable ethics, which is to hold oneself higher than the set standard, is as important a judicial tenet as having, say, experience or judicial temperament, it is also unfair to constantly shift the goalposts of acceptable behaviour, lest no one wants to become a judge out of fear of not being able to do anything other than read judgements and pounding the gavel. 

Diversity in the judiciary is important, and there should be no reason it does not include people who dance to old songs. – January 23, 2019.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.