Even though the Defendant contended that there was investigation into the allegations against the Plaintiff, this Court observes that the Defendant did not annex any report in proof that there was an investigation stricto sensu. The only document relevant to this issue from the Defendant’s pleadings is the Charge Sheet from the national Courts. In the said Charge Sheet, the Court observes that charges contained in counts 6, 7, 8 & 9 on false information are those connected with the investigation report annexed to the Plaintiff’s application as ANNEXURE “5”. There is neither a Caution Statement nor investigation report on the allegations of abuse of office, criminal fraud and breach of trust, conspiracy to defeat justice, offences relating to judicial proceedings and false assumption of authority as contained in the said Charge Sheet particularly Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. There is also no evidence of the Plaintiff being subjected to the Judicial Service Commission or a judicial tribunal as the case may be in his capacity as a former Chief Justice. Lord Phillips in a hearing on the Report of the Chief Justice of Gibraltar [2009] UKPC 43 stated at paragraph 1 stated that: “The independence of the judiciary requires that a judge should never be removed without good cause and that the question of removal be determined by an appropriate independent and impartial tribunal. The principle applies with particular force where the judge in question is a Chief Justice.” The Defendant maintained that the petition was addressed to the Judicial Service Commission alleging serious malpractices by the Plaintiff based on certain revelations contained in an audio recording published by the press. That the 29