The 22 years of Dr Mahathir Mohamad's reign as prime minister of Malaysia come to an end today.

It would be apt to review the impact that this has had on the Malaysian judiciary and on the doctrine of separation of powers, which is essential for good government and to prevent an over-concentration of power on any one of the three bodies of government - the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.

After obtaining independence from the British in 1957 until the mid-1980s, the Malaysian judiciary built a reputation of being independent and impartial and was held in high public esteem.

There was, it seems, no accusation of judicial improprieties, corruption, bias and/or judicial misconduct during this period. After Independence, one still had a right of appeal to the Privy Council if one was aggrieved with the decision of the Federal Court.

But as time passed fewer and fewer appeals were taken up to the Privy Council and this can be taken only as an indication of the public satisfaction and appreciation of the competency of the Malaysian Judiciary.

Finally, it was decided towards the end of the 1970s that this right of appeal to the Privy Council be discontinued. The Federal Court in the early 1980s became the final Court of Appeal in Malaysia, and was renamed the Supreme Court.

When Mahathir became the prime minister - he was the first person without a legal background to assume this position - he too apparently did have a rather high regard for the Malaysian judiciary.

At the advent of his premiership, in a speech made at the opening ceremony of the Asean Law Association General Assembly on 26 October 1982, he had this to say about the Malaysian Judiciary:

"I will always respect the judiciary. We do not expect the courts to be pro- or anti-government, only pro the Constitution and pro the law. The government always considers the constitution and the law carefully before we do anything so we expect the judiciary to be free to judge our alleged trespasses without fear or favour, but in accordance with the law, in accordance with the law of evidence and procedure justly and fairly. We shall always respect their judgments..."