Apropos the interesting editorial of February 12, Justice In A Small State, may I be allowed to remark on the very last paragraph of the same. The leader writer states: "As one brilliant Maltese judge once said: Justice must not only be done but seen to be done. However, first it must be done".

The writer seems to attribute the origin of the saying to an un-named brilliant Maltese judge but the phrase was coined in 1924 by Lord Chief Justice Hewart, in this way: "Justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done."

The dictum is very dangerous - be seen to be done, by whom? It is dangerous for it is a grave temptation for a weak magistrate or judge who is made to be afraid lest his judgment is not "seen" to be just. Especially in criminal matters and tainted with a political colour.

Presumably the answer to that question is: by a majority of citizens or by "public opinion" whatever that may mean. But justice does not depend on any of these factors. If those who judge seek to please the majority or public opinion in their judgments, surely they are clearly taking a road which is not in conformity with any known and studied criteria and principles of justice.

I have always been against even acknowledging the saying as a guide for reaching a just solution in a judgment. Justice is in most cases a difficult achievement in judgments and, at best, can only be the product of study and reflection of no mean quality. In 1999, I contributed an article in the weekly II-Ġens Illum wherein I set out why there are cogent and grave reasons against this "favourable appearance" of justice.

History is littered with cases of grave injustices following judgments simply based on conformity with the principle that the judgment has to "be seen" to be just. Similarly, on the opposite bank of the river, injustice is inflicted on those who judge according to the dictates of jstice. Space does not allow me to recount the numerous examples which our own history supplies, but one example can be excused.

In 1799, during the Maltese uprising against the French, a doctor, Giovanni Bruno, came out of besieged Valletta and was captured by the Maltese troops who took him to Mdina to face a trial for treason.

Judge Giuseppe Debono, who conducted the trial, could find no proof of Bruno's treason and set him free. But this was not seen to be just by the crowd awaiting the verdict. Whereupon the crowd lynched the doctor and shot at the judge.

Indeed, Judge Debono, held to the opposite principle to that of Lord Hewart, which goes ruat coelum, fiat justitia - even against the threatening roar of thunder, justice must be done. For more recent examples within living memory I think reflection by readers should suffice. Over the years I have been distressed to note how popular the phrase has become. However, no one quotes it correctly for the part of phrase which goes "but should manifestly and undoubtedly" is significantly left out. But the implications of this, I leave for analysis to a future date. Thus to mention just a few examples from the last three months of one year - the phrase in its abbreviated form appeared in articles in The Sunday Times on October 18, 1998, page 8; The Times on November 5, 1998, page 7; the headline in The Sunday Times on December 20, page 13.

Finally, the same editorial referred to a recent decision by the Strasbourg Court. I will comment on that in good time and on another occasion.