Judicial Independence Flashcards
(46 cards)
What is judicial independence?
An indispensable principle of a liberal democracy and the rule of law
Sir Robin Cooke
Argued it was one of two “unalterable” fundamentals that might arguably lie beyond legislative reach
Vital for maintaining two things
The rule of law and the constitutional balance under the Westminster system
Separation under the Westminster system
Separation of the judicial power more complete than the separation of the executive and legislature (e.g. s 6 CA1986 - a minister of the crown must be an elected member of parliament). Due to this merging, we heavily rely on the judiciary as a check and balance
s 25(a) NZBORA
Everyone charged with an offence has a right to a hearing by an independent and impartial court
Metropolitan Properties Co v Lannon
Justice must be rooted in confidence; and confidence is destroyed when right minded people go away thinking “the judge was biased”
Valente v R
Impartiality and independence are fundamental to the capacity of the courts to do justice and maintain public confidence in the justice system
Three limbs
Security of judicial tenure, security of judicial salaries, institutional independence of the courts
Pre Act of Settlement
Throughout the 17th century, the Stuart Kings disdained independence of judicial mind, and their dismissal power was a powerful disincentive for judges who would assert their independence of mind and action
Act of Settlement 1700
Secured judges tenure, reduced Crown’ power to control appointments to office = cornerstone of judicial independence, contains phraseology which survives in many constitutions including US. Became constitutional convention that a judge could only be dismissed on misbehaviour (could only be commissioned for good behaviour)
Terrell v Secretary of State for the Colonies
Lord Goddard CJ doubted whether any colony inherited the provisions os s3 guaranteeing judicial independence
NZ
Did not receive guarantee of judicial independence upon establishment of colonty
Supreme Court Judges Act 1858
s4: judicial tenure
ss 8-9 judicial salaries
conferred power of appointment to governor
CA 1986
Re-enacted provisions from the Supreme Court Judges Act 1858
s 23 CA1986
Protects judges against removal from office. Judges may only be removed from office via an address of the HOR on one of two grounds: misbehaviour or incapacity (s 134 SCA 2016)
DCJ security of tenure
Do not have the same security of tenure as Senior Court Judges: can be removed by the GG on advice of the AG with no address of parliament (s 29(1) DCA 2016)
No address to remove a judge in NZ history, but 3 inquiries
o 1874 SC Judge Chapman accused of bias, but parliamentary inquiry found allegations to be unfounded
o 1890: Edwards J persuaded to take an early retirement because of “ill temper and vindictiveness”
o 2004: Wilson J accused of judicial bias because he had a close business relationship with counsel for a party in a case he was sitting on. Judicial Conduct Panel was established, but he elected to resign
DCJ Complaints
No precedent for the removal of an inferior court judge. E.g. 1965 the Minister of Justice forced the retirement of two magistrates under veiled threat of dismissal. One had failing health and had become irascible and difficult to deal with in court; the other interrogated witnesses, was overbearing and unprofessional, and prejudged cases
- Would rather resign than face public inquiry and become a spectacle
Non-tenure judges
Do strike at the institutional independence of the Courts.
o R v Te Kahu: court accepted judges might seek to secure post retirement appointment and may not be as independent and impartial as judges on permanent tenure (s 116 SCA 2016 judges can be temporarily appointed)
o However, are also convenient and may ease workload pressure
Statutory abolition/restructuring of courts
Kirby J: abolition/restructuring of courts poses “a grave threat to judicial independence”. Thinks judges whose courts are abolished must be reappointed to similar courts with a similar salary, and that these requirements are an “unyielding convention”
Claydon v AG
Established 3 principles in obiter:
o The restructuing of a court would certainly offend the guarantee of judicial independence
o Judges whose court was abolished/restructed were entitled to reappointment, or continuing to receive the benefits of office (accepting Kirby argument)
o Abolishing a tribunal in order to remove particular members would certainly violate judicial independence
In NZ, no political appetite for idealised conception of judicial independence
Supported by Coroners Act 2006. Established restructured coronial system: arguments based on judicial independence held no sway when this act was enacted. Disestablished all existing coroner positions – 55 mostly part-time coroners in NZ, all of their positions disestablished
Prince Edwards Island Case
Judges remuneration must not fall beneath a minimum level that could be perceived as exposing them to political pressure through economic manipulation