SO exalted is the tradition of the institution of the highest judiciary in the country that people prefer not to use the word 'controversy' in relation to any outgoing chief justice, rather leaving it to history to judge him for what he was worth. But unfortunately Chief Justice Syed JR Mudassir Husain retired Wednesday with a spate of controversies surrounding him so much so that he did not receive the traditional farewell from the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).

Against this backdrop and in the light of his experience and insights as a judge of the highest court, the newly inducted Chief Justice Mohammad Ruhul Amin has stressed the need for restoring discipline, dignity and mutual respect at all levels of the institution -- bench, bar and the litigants. The dwindling public confidence in the judiciary must be restored. And one couldn't agree more with him that litigant is the 'soul' of the judicial institution.

The question is: during the tenure of the judges how many of them could live up to the lofty principles they would have genuinely like to. That's where we come to the intertwined principles of politicisation of the judiciary by the power that be and what vicious effect it has to curb the independence of the highest judiciary. This is not to say though that benign judicial activism in public interest litigation has not bolstered the cause of human rights, civil liberties and natural justice. Our hats off to some landmark judgements which need to be replicated.

Now that independence of the judiciary from the executive is a gettable reality, the Supreme Court's responsibilities have vastly increased in translating the advantage into recruiting legal officers and judges of unquestionable merit and probity.

Chief Justice Mohammad Ruhul Amin's call to follow the path of 'our predecessors, who added dignity and honour to this institution' could not have come a day later.