Introduction to Tribunals

Introduction to Tribunals

• Tribunals are special bodies established by law to settle disputes
• Tribunals handle disputes outside the court system
• They adjudicate between individuals and government departments, or between two individuals
• Tribunals replaced the courts in certain areas as courts became overloaded with cases
• The power to adjudicate traditionally belonged to the court
• Currently, administrative bodies share this power with courts

Characteristics of Tribunals

• Tribunals act independently of administrative bodies
• They make impartial decisions between the parties involved in the dispute
• Decisions are binding and relate to the case heard
• Decisions are typically made by a panel of tribunal members rather than one person
• Procedures are often simpler and more flexible than court procedures
• Tribunals are permanent and specifically designed to handle specific types of cases.

Reasons for Tribunal Growth

• Expansion in administrative functions and responsibilities, creating new disputes
• Complex socio-economic activities generated more disputes
• Legislation modifications and new laws led to increased disputes
• Existing court systems became overloaded with cases
• Tribunals provide a way to expedite and reduce the cost of resolving disputes

Strengths of Tribunals

• Expedition: Tribunals resolve cases quickly, in a shorter period as they aren't bound by the same technical requirements as courts. Minor cases are often handled here swiftly
• Informal procedure: Tribunals focus on an informal atmosphere, avoiding burdensome rules and procedures sometimes found in the courts
• Expertise: Tribunal members are specialists in their field, making decisions informed by expert knowledge
• Independence: Tribunals operate separately from administrative bodies, ensuring unbiased judgments
• Cheapness: Tribunal fees are often lower than court costs, a benefit for small businesses or individuals

Weaknesses of Tribunals

• Tribunals are not as impartial or sound as courts. Courts are considered more independent from the administration
• Tribunal members may lack formal legal training and therefore, their understanding of the law may be inadequate
• Decisions are not always published, making it difficult to understand their reasoning for conclusions. The lack of publishing makes it difficult for others to understand the tribunals' reasoning.
• Members may be too focused on enforcing departmental policies, potentially leading to biased decisions that disregard individual cases.
• Procedural informality can sometimes degenerate into a lack of proper procedure, resulting in inconsistent decisions not based on law or evidence

Adjudicatory Bodies in Malaysia

• Malaysia has a variety of adjudicatory bodies
• Special Commission of Income Tax adjudicates appeals from tax decisions
• Industrial Courts settle disputes between employers and workers
• Public inquiries are used for investigations where no decisions are needed

Special Commission of Income Tax (Structure)

• Commission of officers designated to hear tax appeals
• Members are appointed by the Director General of Inland Revenue based on qualifications and experiences
• The Commissioner has the power of review and examination of witnesses, and ability to summon them
• Cases are reviewed and then heard by designated commissioners
• Decisions made by this commission are final
• Procedures for appeals/disagreements to special commissions are well outlined in law

Industrial Court (Structure)

• Part of the Industrial Relations Act 1967
• The president of the court is appointed by the YDPA
• Three panel members with independent expertise (employers and workers)
• Cases are brought before an appointed panel member
• The Minister may appoint parties to cases with the right of representation by a legal official
• Decisions are made by a majority of the panel of members, with the President having a casting vote in cases of ties

Public Inquiries

• Public Inquiries are not decision-making bodies, but rather investigate and report on matters
• They provide a platform for the public to voice their concerns
• Reports highlight issues and facts gathered for decision-making by higher authorities

Provisions in the Companies Act 1965

• Government has the authority to appoint inspectors to investigate company affairs
• Inspectors can demand documents and examine company officials under oath
• Failure to comply with requests could lead to legal consequences
• Inspections must observe due process, and not infringe on the rights of businesses

Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950

• empowers the YDPA (Yang di-Pertuan Agong) to appoint commissioners
• Commissions may investigate conduct of federal officials, public service departments, and certain institutions
• Ensures transparency and accountability of public bodies
• Focuses on issues concerning public welfare

Powers of Commissioners (Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950)

• Power to acquire relevant evidence
• Conduct questioning under oath
• Compel appearance and testimony

Franks Committee (UK, 1955)

• Committee conducted an in-depth review of tribunal systems
• Recommended improvements to enhance impartiality and fairness in tribunals, such as appointing a Lord Chancellor to monitor the tribunals and working with the specific council.
• Proposed statutory provisions for tribunal structure and procedure
• Emphasized the need for tribunals to be independent of administrations

Functions of the Council on Tribunals (UK)

• Regularly reviews and updates tribunal constitutions
• Provides advice and recommendations to improve tribunal systems
• Develops standards for tribunals to follow