More often than not, leaders in high places, be it from the ruling parties or the government resort to the 'best defence is to attack' tactic when issues of great national interest are brought before them.

The sacking, prosecution and incarceration of Anwar Ibrahim is one typical example where such tactics were used to justify the actions taken by them. Media (electronic and print) were conveniently used as mediums for merciless attack, leaving Anwar with limited, tightly controlled 'meet the people sessions' to defend himself.

When Anwar received a black eye by no other than the former inspector general of police Rahim Noor, Dr Mahathir was quick to quip that Anwar could have self-inflicted his own injury. To add salt to the injury, Rafidah Aziz went one step further by claiming that such a mark could easily be done using a glass or cup, much to the wonder of our students abroad

It is becoming a culture if not tradition, so to speak, when new issues crop up, leaders in this category while defending their actions or that of their ministries, stand up vocally at the expense of the parties who brought up the matter.

Opposition parties, workers and student unions, NGOs and individuals, just to name a few, were always the target of their attacks even before any formal investigation relating to the issues in question were carried out.

I wish to refer to the latest issue, the exposure by High Court judge Muhammad Kamil Awang on the 'mystery caller' who had directed him to strike off two Likas petitions without hearing.

I was saddened by Dr Mahathir's remarks that "somebody from the same courthouse could have made the call" in his earliest reaction to the issue.

Though I understood that he meant anybody could make such call, I feel that it is most appropriate for an investigation to be carried out before remarks of that nature are made public.

Furthermore, the exposure has been made in a written judgment by a learned judge. He must have checked the 'evidence' before an exposure of a such nature is written.

I am pleased to read in today's paper that the judge has named the person in his letter to Chief Justice Dzaiddin Abdullah. Until and unless this issue is properly handled, we should refrain from issuing negative remarks that can be categorised as an attack on the relevant party or parties concerned.