The court will not decide academic questions when the facts of a case have changed and no live issues remain.

[1] These references of constitutional questions under s 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 raise the issue of whether the appointments of the 2nd respondent and the 3rd respondent as the Chief Justice of Malaysia and the President of the Court of Appeal respectively, after their mandatory retirements, are valid and constitutional.

[2] In Civil Reference No: 06-01-2018(W), the applicant is the Bar Council who represents the advocate and solicitors in West Malaysia. In Civil Reference No. 06(f)-5-02-2018(Q), the applicant, the President of the Advocates Association of Sarawak, represents the advocates in Sarawak.

[3] Pursuant to an Order of the High Court at Kuching dated 23 March 2018 inter alia, the Sabah Law Society was permitted to appear as amicus curiae at the hearing of the Reference No: 06-5-02-2018(Q). Motion for intervener was filed on 13 December 2017 by the Muslim Lawyers Association in the suit filed by the Bar Council. Leave to intervene was allowed by the High Court at Kuala Lumpur.

[4] Both the High Courts referred the following constitutional questions to this Court for determination:

1. Whether under art 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution , an additional judge can be appointed on the advice of the Chief Justice, which advice is to take effect after the latter's retirement?

2. Whether under art 122(1A) read together with art 122B(1), 122B(2) and art 125(1) of the Federal Constitution an additional judge can be appointed as the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of Appeal?

3. Whether the appointment of judges by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong under arts 122(1A) and 122B(1) of the Federal Constitution is justiciable?

4. Whether the appointment of additional judges and thereafter of the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal announced whilst they were serving judges but to take effect after retirement violates arts 122(1), 122(1A) and 125(1) of the Federal Constitution ?

5. It is instructive to indicate at this point that the coram was made up of Justice Hasan Lah, Justice Zainun Ali, Justice Zaharah Ibrahim, Justice Ramly Ali, Justice Balia Yusof, Justice Aziah Ali and Justice Alizatul Khair.

This coram was empanelled by the then Chief Judge of Malaya, Justice Ahmad Maarop.

[5] We heard the arguments of parties on 14 March 2018 and reserved our judgment.

Background Facts

[6] The facts are not in dispute. The applicants actions were based on the following media statement dated 7 July 2017, issued by the Prime Minister's Office:

"MEDIA STATEMENT

APPOINTMENT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE Court OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA WHO ARE APPOINTED AS ADDITIONAL JUDGES IN THE FEDERAL Court PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 122(1A) OF THE Federal Constitution

Pursuant to Article 122B(1) of the Federal Constitution , His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, on the advice of the Prime Minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers convened on the 24th and 25th of May 2017, is pleased to announce the following:

(i) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Md Raus bin Sharif who has been appointed as an additional judge in the Federal Court for a period of 3 years commencing from 4th of August 2017 pursuant to Article 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution , to continue holding the positions of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court from the date and for the same period; and

(ii) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin who was appointed as an additional judge for the Federal Court for a period of two years commencing from 28th September 2017 pursuant to art 122(1A) of the Federal Constitution , to continue holding the position of the Presid