Human Rights Commission chairperson Abu Talib Othman in an exclusive interview with malaysiakini recently had expressed the hope that the judiciary should mend itself.

Malaysiakini

found Abu Talib, a former attorney-general, "surprisingly frank and open over the shortcomings of the judiciary in Malaysia".

Abu Talib had also expressed his dissatisfaction over the conduct of judges who were involved in the controversial trials, and subsequent appeals, of former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

"As far as the court is concerned, I think it is very important that judges conduct themselves in such a way as to enhance public confidence in the administration of justice.

"For these judges (in the Anwar Ibrahim appeal case), I think they should examine themselves and be sure that justice is not o­nly done but seen to be done in all cases," he asserted.

Indeed Abu Talib appears to be quite open and brave in his comments but o­ne cannot help but ask, how, in the first place, did the judiciary slip into such a deep pit of infamy as we see today.

Without the need for much debate the tragic loss of the judiciary's independence and public's confidence in the judiciary can be traced back to 1988 when the then Lord President Mohamed Salleh Abas was sacked.

It can be seen as the day when the judiciary was also sacked and it has never recovered since then.

No o­ne has described this fact so succinctly than the late and former Lord President Mohamed Suffian Mohd Hashim, who, in a speech made in honour of the late justice Wan Sulaiman in Kuala Lumpur o­n March 10, 2000, had declared:

"I had predicted that our judiciary would take a whole generation to recover from the assault. Now that more than 12 years have elapsed, I doubt if the judiciary would recover in a generation from today."

History has it that the person who played a very major role in the conspiracy to get rid of the then Lord President, which ultimately resulted a crisis in the judiciary as a whole, was Abu Talib.

Rais Yatim in his book Freedom Under Executive Power in Malaysia highlights this fact pointedly: "It is significant to point out that the attorney-general, Abu Talib Othman, who was completely relied upon by the prime minister during the crisis, played an outstanding role in the removal of Salleh (Abas). Subsequently he also played a similar role in the removal of two other Supreme Court judges in his capacity as 'assistant' to the Tribunal."

Abu Talib chose to be subservient and to be an 'accomplice' in the conspiracy. He had every excuse not to be involved but he found every excuse in planning and participating in the disgraceful act of bringing down his former superior.

"In the first place, the attorney-general who is at all material times the legal advisor to the prime minister and thus an officer of the executive should not have been involved in the Tribunal's work at all," wrote Rais Yatim.

In May Day For Justice Mohamed Salleh would recall how he had groomed Abu Talib o­nly to be betrayed by him o­ne day:

"I have known this man Abu Talib Othman for a long time...I chose Abu Talib, who was then a comparatively junior officerI took him to Geneva ... I also took him as my junior in the prosecution of some memorable cases

"All these things were done with the view of building Tan Sri Abu Talib's public stature so that he would be acceptable both to the authorities and to the public, to succeed me when I had to finally leave the Chambers.

"We went together through other vicissitudes in court. He did assist me more than o­nce in prosecuting the high and the mighty. I then thought him fearless and fair as a prosecutor...

"Never did I entertain the thought that o­ne day he would turn against me, and in the way he did."

In a very sad and tragic line, Mohamed Salleh would write: "And it was to emerge, subsequently, that it was none other than the attorney-general himself who had actually framed the charges against me!"

In a very emotional tone, in the foreword of May Day For Justice the late Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, the first prime minister of Malaysia, would describe the removal of Mohamed Salleh as an event that has "sullied the fair name of this country".

"...it struck a terrible blow, not o­nly to the independence of the Malaysian judiciary - and ruined the careers of at least three honourable men - but to national pride itself.... It has severely damaged the people's faith in the law and brought several judges into disrepute. It will take a long time for us to recover from the horror and shame of this episode."

Abu Talib's sermon to the judges to be brave and independent sounds very much like a joke when he himself is guilty of participating in the country's most shameful episode that killed the independence of the judiciary.

Surely it calls for some soul-searching o­n the part of Suhakam's chairperson.