| |
| When politics and justice don’t mix: judicial appointments under scrutiny |
| |
|
Contact: Azadeh Khalilizadeh from FindLaw
|
| |
Australia’s system of appointing judges has been under the spotlight in recent months, with some critics labelling the traditional government method as “outdated” and a “recipe for political bias.”
The concern follows a number of recent appointments around Australia, including:
NSW Attorney-General Bob Debus appointing his adviser Jacqueline Trad to the Federal Magistrates Court. She took office two months after being admitted as a solicitor.
The appointment of John O’Sullivan as a federal magistrate, who was the former adviser to Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews. Mr O’Sullivan has three years’ practical legal experience.
The appointment of Queensland Supreme Court judge Ann Lyons, who was appointed from her position as president of the state Guardianship and Administration Tribunal. She has never practised as a barrister.
Critics warn “flawed” system will “damage” public confidence
On 31 August 2006 in a public lecture held at the Queensland University of Technology, former Queensland Court of Appeal judge Geoffrey Davies questioned the current merit-based system, which involves appointment by federal or state attorney-generals.
Mr Davies argued the system was “seriously flawed” and risked “party political or other motivations” overriding the selection of better-qualified candidates.
The Law Council of Australia (LCA) also fears recent appointments could “damage public confidence” in the court system.
LCA president Tim Bugg told ABC radio on 11 July 2006:
“It’s obviously not a good thing for the appointee, it’s very unhelpful, to say the least, for the court to which the person has been appointed and it has the possibility of minimising the confidence which people have in the court system”.
Viable alternatives – the debate continues
As reported by AAP on 31 August 2006, Mr Davies proposed an independent body to overlook judicial appointments, as already established in many countries including Britain, Ireland and Canada.
The panel, he suggested could comprise the chief justice, head of a law school, as well as the presidents of the bar association and law society. Mr Davies even suggested a place for community and public representatives such as the head of the Salvation Army and a newspaper editor.
Australian Bar Association (ABA) president Glenn Martin SC said the ABA is also developing a number of models for consideration.
“Some countries with a similar legal system have moved away from the method used here and we should give careful thought to whether we can be better served by adopting a new approach,” he said in a statement dated 10 August 2006.
The ABA announced it will host a one-day forum to consider concerns being expressed and what alternatives might be available.
“There has been some disquiet expressed recently about appointments at both Commonwealth and State levels,” said ABA president Glenn Martin SC. “Any debate on this topic should be informed and can best be achieved through an open discussion about the appointment system currently being used.”
The ABA said the date and place of the forum would depend on the availability of speakers.
It is likely it will take place in Canberra or Sydney in late October or early November.
September, 2006
|
| |
|
