Allegations of bullying, harassment and “the overbearing nature” of judges made up some of the complaints among the hundreds lodged against the country’s judiciary this past year.
According to the recently released Judicial Conduct Commissioner’s annual report, there were 332 complaints made by members of the public against judges in the year to July 31, 2023.
While that figure has increased by nine from the previous year, it has almost doubled since the year to July 31, 2019, when 191 complaints were ecorded.
However, only two complaints in the past five years have been escalated to a Judicial Conduct Panel, with the majority of the remainder being dismissed.
Of the most recent gripes, one area to have seen an increase in complaints was the sentencing of young offenders, commissioner Alan Ritchie said in his report.
The complaints were over the young offenders receiving a discharge without conviction or community detention rather than imprisonment, he said.
“Sentencing law and principles are not necessarily easy to follow and general community concern is understandable.
“However, no judicial misconduct was able to be identified and no such complaint was upheld.”
Most of the complaints from the past year were against district court judges, who make up the bulk of the country’s judiciary, with 129 compared to 97 the previous year.
Complaints related to judges from the Youth Court sat at six this year, up from the two recorded in the previous period, while there was no change seen in the Family Court, which remained at 83.
Ritchie said many of the complaints made in relation to Family Court judges came from people who have not had the benefit of legal representation and reflected tension arising from disputes over children and property.
“Otherwise, and consistent with earlier years, most complaints arise from disagreement with the outcome of proceedings or with particular decisions made by Judges.”
But Ritchie said he did not have the authority to challenge or call into question the legality of a judge’s decision, only their behaviour, and many such complaints had to be dismissed.
The commissioner’s role was to deal with complaints about judges. Anyone could complain about a judge, but complaints had to be about conduct, inside or outside court, and not about the decision.
After an initial assessment, a complaint was either dismissed, considered to require no further action, or referred up to a head of bench.
In general, allegations about “harassment, bullying and overbearing behaviour” by judges have continued into the year under review.
Ritchie said such complaints were dependent on the availability of good-quality audio recordings of hearings.
Those were usually available and no complaint of that type has been upheld in this past year.
However, there was one referral to a head of bench when a recording was not available.
Of the 332 complaints received, 49 required no further action, 225 were dismissed, and 10 were withdrawn.
There were 23 complaints that were escalated to the heads of the various judicial benches.
Those included complaints relating to delays in issuing judgments, individuals who had been found in contempt of court being held in custody, a judge’s comments or responses, the accuracy of names in court documents and the use of judicial email for private communication.
The Governor-General could formally remove a judge from office if misconduct was established.
