I am totally appalled by the scathing attack of a High Court Judge against Justice Gopal Sri Ram. I am quite sure Justice RK Nathan does not realise the consequences of him airing his grievances to the press.

Justice Nathan is not only attacking Gopal in his personal capacity, but seems to suggest that the Court of Appeal is not competent and to quote him only see " the cold stare of hard print of the Appeal Records" ( The Star Aug 1).

Nathan should realise that, that is the system of justice not only in Malaysia but in many parts of the world. That is also the Malaysian system of justice that the Court of Appeal will decide base on the lower court's grounds of judgment, notes of evidence pleadings and exhibits which forms the Appeal Record.

Nathan should realise that the Court of Appeal comprises three Appellate Judges and often the judges discuss among themselves on the case before the lead judge delivers his judgment, or they may deliver their individual judgments if they think it is necessary to do so.

In this case Gopal delivers the judgment. The decision was unanimous; meaning whatever remarks made in the decision are made and delivered collectively by the three judges. It is glaring that Nathan seems to feel intimidated by Gopal's judgment and perceived that Gopal's judgment is a personal attack against him.

I however see it as the Court of Appeal delivering a stern advice and reminder to the court below to keep check on judges' personal egos. It so happens that the judgment was delivered by Gopal in his normally curt, frank, laconic and sometimes caustic manner and this is in keeping within the fine tradition of the bench everywhere in the civilised world.

Nathan is being extremely silly to complain that Ram's own judgment has been reversed many times by the Federal Court. By making such a statement, is Nathan suggesting that Gopal is incompetent? Certainly not. Gopal is one of the very rare breed of practising lawyers elevated straight to the Court of Appeal when most judges would normally spend time in the High Court before they are elevated to higher courts.

Nathan in his judgment pens down five pages to air his complaint against Gopal on a totally unrelated case. His motive, in its mildest, can be said to be childish, at its most extreme, an abuse of justice and the office he holds as a high court judge.

To write down his complaint in a judgment, Nathan hopes that this case will be carried in the Law Report and kept as a record for posterity for all to read. By so doing Nathan, has only brought shame for betraying the integrity of the judicial office of the judge and has abused not only the law but justice itself.

Even if Nathan feels that the perceived attacked by a member of the court of appeal is uncalled for, he knows that it is against the tradition of the bench to air complaints in public. The proper avenue for Nathan is to bring it up with his boss, the chief judge.

Now that he has decided to hang his own 'dirty linen' in public, the chief judge must intervene in the matter and intervene decisively. The Bar Council is trying their level best to check the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary, with this latest behaviour, the erosion of confidence is more acute. The only avenue for Nathan now is to tender his resignation and leave the bench gracefully.