It was six long years ago that Malta experienced the darkest day in its judicial history. The then Chief Justice, Noel Arrigo, and former judge Patrick Vella, were charged with taking bribes in a high profile drugs case.

The Prime Minister at the time, Eddie Fenech Adami, was so angered that his words went beyond what a seasoned politician of his stature would normally utter in such circumstances. He publicly condemned them before the courts had had the opportunity to even charge the judges-turned-defendants.

Even if his outburst was at the time somewhat ill-advised, Dr Fenech Adami's disdain at what had taken place was more than understandable. Everybody knew that the judicial system could be slow and inefficient. But that it could also be corrupt was till that moment the stuff of horror fiction.

Photographs of former judge Patrick Vella walking out of prison last Friday - attired in shirt, sandals and carrying a plastic bag after serving a 16-month jail term - brought back painful memories of that incident. But at least it served as a timely reminder that our justice system can be applied to everyone in equal measure.

Of course, 'can' is not to be equated with 'is'. While Dr Vella eventually did the decent thing and owned up to his crime, Dr Arrigo has been going about his normal business - attending parties and even having the gall to greet what seemed to be an embarrassed Dr Fenech Adami at the St Publius feast earlier this year.

That his case has not been heard after six years, for whatever legal reason, is nothing short of shameful. The nature of such an allegation meant there were more pressing reasons than ever that he should be dealt with swiftly. But it unfortunately is a reflection of what the court system is today: ridiculously slow, disorganised and largely unaccountable.

This is the only statement that can describe a state of affairs where so many magisterial inquiries are pending; where so many cases are unheard; where sentencing depends not on structured tariffs or reasoning but on the judge one is fortunate, or unfortunate, enough to appear before.

This is not to say that there are not a good number of diligent, hard-working magistrates and judges. There are. But there are too many that are not. And something needs to be done.

The problem, of course, is what? The Commission for the Administration of Justice, set up to regulate and discipline the judiciary, is clearly not working. Whatever one thinks of its Constitutional status, it cannot be denied that although it can issue censure, it cannot go the necessary step further and impose sanction.

The case of Antonio Mizzi and Lino Farrugia Sacco - who do not think that the code of ethics applies to them - is ample evidence of this. The government has made an implicit admission of this too, choosing to endow the Chief Justice with more powers to deal with errant members of his brethren. Although this is a positive step, it raises more questions over the need for the Commission. And the Chief Justice needs to be able to exercise harsher disciplinary measures than simply redistributing cases.

There is, also, a wider issue that our judiciary must consider: how can they expect the man in the street to observe rules - and have the moral authority to penalise him for not doing so - when some of their members cannot do so themselves?