CHIEF Justice Sir Ti Liang Yang yesterday said he would not resign over the controversy surrounding his remarks on the Bill of Rights made public by the Xinhua Deputy Director, Zhang Junsheng. 'I can swear under the sky and the sun, I did nothing wrong in this case and I can face the people,' Sir Ti Liang said. He said his offer to write to the Chief Secretary about his views on the Bill of Rights was not an invitation to the executive branch to interfere with the Judiciary. The Chief Justice has been criticised for agreeing to explain his thoughts on the bill to Anson Chan Fang On-sang. He also disclosed he was drafting a more comprehensive paper on his personal views on the issue. 'As Chief Secretary, it is natural for her to be concerned about my view on the Bill of Rights,' he said. 'And, as the issue involves many technical terms, it would be easier for her to understand it in written form.' He added he hoped the document could be made public. 'The document will be written not only for Mrs Chan, but also for the public and thus will be in simple terms, in a hope that it can be understood by laymen,' he said. He refused to say whether he felt betrayed by Chinese officials, saying the question should be left for them to answer. One judge, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said it was wrong for Sir Ti Liang to report to Mrs Chan on the issue. 'There is no reason for him to explain to the Chief Secretary. Even though we [judges] are paid by taxpayers, we are not civil servants,' he said. The judge said even if Sir Ti Liang had to do some explaining, he should do it to the Governor and not Mrs Chan. A spokesman for the Judiciary said it had been Sir Ti Liang's idea to clarify his views on the human rights legislation. 'It was not an order from Mrs Chan. Nor is it Sir Ti Liang's duty to do so,' she said. 'He simply wanted Mrs Chan to understand his stance.' There was no question of compromising the independence of the Judiciary, she said. The judge said many colleagues shared Sir Ti Liang's reported views on the Bill of Rights - that it undermined the legal system. The ordinance differed from common law, which is based on precedent. High Court and Appeal Court judges were not used to adjudicating cases based on its provisions. Legislator Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, who represents the legal profession, said it would be unacceptable if Mrs Chan had asked Sir Ti Liang to give her a written account of what he told Mr Zhang. 'The Chief Justice is accountable to the public but not to the administration,' she said. But she welcomed his bid to explain his views, saying: 'The public wants to know his stance.' A senior government source said: 'There's no question of us 'demanding' a report from him, interfering with the Judiciary or the position of the Chief Justice.'