Instead of arguing that such a disclosure would be an "irrational intrusion" into their privacy, they could have taken the moral high ground, by agreeing to such an "intrusion" in the greater interest of transparency, thereby setting an example of good governance.

I am sure our honourable judges have nothing to hide, in spite of insinuations to the contrary by the p arliamentary committee chairman.

Such a noble gesture would have made it very difficult for government officials to oppose any similar regulations from applying to them in future.

The proposal almost seems to be a ploy by government and parliament members to use the judges' defiance to ensure that they are never subjected to similar regulations themselves.