Another delay. Another “need more time.” At this rate, bagai menunggu buah tak gugur, the ruling on the Cahya Mata Sarawak-Abu Bekir records case seems to be taking almost as long as the case itself.
And frankly, there is no need to make excuses for the Judicial Commissioner. The question is simple: how much more time is actually needed?
The matter was filed in March 2025. We are now in September 2026 roughly 18 months later and the ruling is still not ready. The decision was supposed to be delivered on September 25, only to be postponed again on September 28.
That is a long time for a dispute that, at its heart, concerns a company director seeking access to corporate accounting and financial records.
Junior corporate folks once told:
“if you sit on a company's board, how are you supposed to discharge your responsibilities properly if you cannot access the company's accounts and records? Directors have duties to understand and oversee what is happening inside the company. Access to relevant corporate information is therefore hardly some exotic legal concept.”
Put it this way: a first-year law student could probably tell you that this is not exactly rocket science.
Of course, the court has the right to take the time it considers necessary before delivering a decision. But 18 months into the matter, the public is entitled to ask whether something this fundamental really requires this much judicial contemplation.
And there is a bigger question here.
If a relatively straightforward corporate records dispute can remain unresolved for around 18 months, what happens when the Sarawak courts are faced with genuinely complex corporate cases involving complicated transactions, multiple companies, financial structures and millions or billions of ringgit?
That is not an attack on the judiciary. It is a question about confidence in the administration of justice.
A Simple Timeline
February 2025 — Abu Bekir sought access to Cahya Mata's accounting and financial information.
March 6, 2025 — The originating summons was filed.
April 2025 — The matter came before the court for further directions.
September 25, 2026 — The ruling was scheduled to be delivered.
September 28, 2026 — The ruling was postponed again because the Judicial Commissioner required more time.
September 30, 2026 — Still waiting for a new date.
Eighteen months.
For a matter concerning access to company records.
Maybe the ruling will finally come soon. Maybe there is a perfectly good reason for the delay that the public does not know.
But until then, one question remains hanging in the air:
How much more time does the court need to decide whether a company director should be allowed to see the records necessary to perform his duties?
Lama-lama, boleh jadi sampai jadi cerita lain.
And that is precisely why the question deserves an answer.
Comments
Post a Comment