1988 Malaysian constitutional crisis

Not long after, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi called the crisis one which the nation had never recovered from and announced ex gratia compensation for the sacked and suspended judges.

In 1987, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) — a leading party in the governing Barisan Nasional coalition – held elections for its numerous offices.

The plaintiffs alleged that 78 of the delegates had been selected by branches not registered with the Registrar of Societies, and as a result were not eligible to vote.

"[7] Mahathir also lashed out at "black sheep [judges] ... who want to be ... fiercely independent," accusing them of playing to public opinion.

Immediately after this latter statement, the government reassigned several High Court judges to different divisions, including Justice Harun Hashim who was then hearing the UMNO case.

The case of the two journalists mentioned earlier had begun when John Berthelsen and Raphael Pura authored a series of articles on financial transactions of dubious ethical and legal nature carried out by government officials.

The Asian Wall Street Journal which published them was promptly banned from the country, and Mahathir in his capacity as Home Affairs Minister had Berthelsen's and Pura's work permits revoked.

However, the Supreme Court overturned the cancellation of Berthelsen's work permit because he had not been given a chance to answer the charges of the government.

"[1] The Lord President of the Supreme Court, Tun Salleh Abas, was pressured by his fellow judges to respond to the government's actions.

[17] In 1988, Tun Salleh Abas was brought before a tribunal convened by the then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad on the grounds of misconduct.

The irregular dismissal of Tun Salleh Abas led the Bar Council of Malaysia to refuse recognising the new Lord President.

His views however were criticised by the then Education Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, who claimed that the Tunku was ″a grand old man who has done his bit.″[19] Mahathir's supporters insisted that it had liberated the Malaysian judiciary from a colonial mindset.

The sacking of several justices was justified by claims that these judges had been abusing public funds for their personal expenses – such as the purchase of luxury furniture from Italy.

Newly appointed Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Shahrir Abdul Samad also voiced support: "The Government has apologised for so many other things to the people, such as the untimely destruction of temples and other issues.

"[24] Zaid's proposal was criticised by former Bar president Param Cumaraswamy, who insisted that Mahathir's administration, not Abdullah's, should assume responsibility: "Those who perpetrated the transgressions are still alive and they must be called to account for their conduct and seek forgiveness from the six valiant judges, their families and Malaysians generally for the sacrilege committed to the temple of independent justice."

"[25] Karpal Singh, lawyer and opposition member of Parliament, agreed: "Calling for the present administration to apologise is not a step in (the) right direction.

[26] A few days later, The Malaysian Insider, a news website, reported that the Cabinet was critical of the proposal, citing the potential for legal liability if the government admitted wrongdoing.

"[27] In April 2008, at a dinner with 600 members of the Bar and leaders from the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition, Abdullah acknowledged the impact of the crisis: To a large extent, the events of 1988 have fueled much of the disagreement on how to move on.

[28]He then announced that the government would make ex gratia goodwill payments to the sacked and suspended judges: "I do not presume to equate your contribution, pain and loss with mere currency but I hope you could accept this as a heartfelt and sincere gesture to mend what had been."

George Seah's son told the press that although all his father wanted was an apology, the family would not reject any goodwill payments.

Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh's wife said: "Although I thank the prime minister, I feel less than satisfied at his decision (not to make a straightforward apology).

"[31] In January 2018, Mahathir (by then leader of Pakatan Harapan after leaving UMNO) denied responsibility for removing Tun Salleh Abas, insisting this was done under instructions from the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Iskandar of Johor.

The former Prime Minister said he was prepared to swear on the Quran that his name had been used by the Attorney-General then, Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, in order to distance the Agong from the matter.

Mahathir claimed that the Agong called him as prime minister and said he wanted Salleh sacked and passed him a copy of the Abas's alleged letter in question.

Dr Mahathir claimed that the matter was discussed by his Cabinet then, which decided on a tribunal to remove Salleh as Lord President.

[33] Former Attorney General Abu Talib Othman agreed that Dr Mahathir was not responsible for dismissing the Lord President.

[34] Abu Talib alleged that the Agong was displeased with Salleh's letter complaining about the criticisms levelled at the judiciary by the executive.

[35] When asked about the revelations, Tun Salleh Abas stated that it was time to move on from the sacking which took place 30 years earlier, and that the crisis was merely being politicised in the lead up to the 14th General Election (where Mahathir was running as the opposition candidate for Prime Minister, which he successfully won later in May).