I refer to your editorial, 'Lawyers in the dock' (The Sunday Times, October 5).

Contrary to the impression given by the headline, and the text, the Chief Justice did not place any 'lawyers in the dock'.

In fact, what the Chief Justice said was that the court was not concerning itself with the legality or otherwise of the negotiations that took place in connection with the case or with the question of whether the people involved, including some lawyers, had behaved correctly or not.

I quote the actual text: "Din il-Qorti mhix imsejħa biex tiddeciedi dwar il-legalità o meno ta' dak li sar f'dan ir-rigward (referring to what the court called "maniġġi minn min kellu interess) jew ta' jekk minn kien involut f'dawn it-trattattivi, inkluzi xi avukati, aġixxewx korretement jew le."

(This court is not called upon to decide on the legality or otherwise of what took place in this regard or on whether whoever was involved in these discussions, including some lawyers, acted correctly or not.)

Clearly, the court did not make any findings and therefore, with due respect, it must be pointed out that your editorial prejudges, and casts negative aspersions on the lawyers involved.

This is an inappropriate position to have been taken by a newspaper that prides itself on its record of fairness.

This is not to say that incorrect behaviour should not be censured, and that advocates are not expected at all times to conduct themselves with integrity towards the Court and their clients, in that order, but without any concrete evidence of impropriety, the tone of your editorial was not fair towards the advocates concerned.

Editor's note: The editorial did not state that the Chief Justice placed lawyers in the dock. It was also made crystal clear that he was considering a separate issue when he made the remarks.

As for being unfair to the lawyers concerned, the editorial stated: "The investigating and prosecuting authorities must take the less-than-subtle hint the Chief Justice has provided and quickly resolve whether the lawyers' conduct in this case was within acceptable boundaries or not."