After 10 years as the nation's most senior judicial officer, departing High Court Chief Justice Murray Gleeson has no regrets. If he did, he cannot remember them.

''If you're asking me whether there are things that I could have done differently or better, the answer is, ''Yes, of course there were','' he told the National Press Club yesterday in a speech about the evolution of the Australian judiciary.

Chief Justice Gleeson, who retires next week at the compulsory age of 70, diplomatically dodged commenting on politically sensitive issues or on individual cases. That was the way it ought to be, he said.

''The legitimacy of the judicial branch depends upon its disengagement from the political process.'' The alternative was fragmentation and weakness, he said.

It is a practice the High Court has long valued. Chief Justice Gleeson said the court had only once been split in line with the political party that appointed the judges, and that was a case about the duty of local councils to repair bridges and roads.

''Australian judges just don't vote according to the colour of the government that appoints them, I'm delighted to say,'' he said.

He was appointed by former prime minister John Howard in 1998.

Chief Justice Gleeson refused to offer his thoughts on a Bill of Rights or the WorkChoices legislation that the High Court upheld two years ago.

The judge, who has been a chief justice for the past 20 years 10 with the NSW Supreme Court and 10 with the High Court was reflective about his time on the bench and was unsure about his life post-law.

''Actually, I don't have many plans for the next chapter of my life,'' he said. ''I'm looking forward to being surprised.''