Huo Raymond: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Huo Raymond: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:8858] 
RAYMOND HUO (Labour) 
: 
 The Judicial Matters Bill matters in various aspects including providing for transparency public confidence and an important constitutional process. The bill passed its first reading in June 2008 under the previous Labour Government and it has been brought to its second reading by the current National Government. The bill was introduced to establish a statutory process for the receipt of a complaint about a judge’s conduct and for the investigation of complaints that would raise a question of removing a judge from office. The bill addresses existing risks arising from the lack of procedure to support a decision to remove a judge and from the public perception of a lack of transparency in the judicial complaints process. 
Public confidence in the judiciary and judicial independence are fundamental in a democracy. Fortunately there have been few complaints so far and the removal of a judge has never been necessary in this country. As the Hon Clayton Cosgrove pointed out when introducing the bill in June 2008 the Office of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner receives approximately 100 complaints a year. Of those approximately 80 percent are dismissed. In the Judicial Conduct Commissioner’s annual report to Parliament he noted that the most common reason for dismissing a complaint has been that it stems from a complainant’s disagreement with the judge’s decision rather than from the judge’s conduct. In the first 2 years four complaints were referred to the relevant head of bench and were resolved through the voluntary internal judicial complaints process. So far the commissioner has not made any recommendation for the appointment of a judicial conduct panel. 
However it is worth noting that complaints about judges are increasing although most are dismissed. The New Zealand Press Association reported on 12 October 2009 that the Judicial Conduct Commissioner said in his annual report that the number of complaints he dealt with in the year ended 31 July 2009 had increased from 132 to 189. This included 139 new complaints and 50 complaints carried over from the previous year when 101 new complaints were laid. The number of complaints against High Court judges had increased from 19 to 44 and complaints against Family Court judges from 13 to 27. Complaints against District Court judges fell from 50 to 48 of the 189 complaints in that year. One hundred and thirteen complaints were dismissed compared with the 80 complaints dismissed in the previous year. This bill takes the precautionary step of setting processes out in law so that the rules will be clear if a situation ever arises. 
In New Zealand law a senior judge can be removed from office by the Governor-General following an address from Parliament. This bill does not change that. It does not change the grounds on which a judge could be removed. Instead it ensures that such a difficult decision will be well supported. In addition the bill incorporates measures relating to judicial immunity part-time service for judges the principal judges of the Family Court and Youth Court and other administrative matters. 
The bill is an omnibus bill which amends the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004 and section 26C(2) of the Judicature Act 1908. The bill proposes to “establish the Office of the Deputy Judicial Conduct Commissioner” “allow the Judicial Conduct Commissioner to decide to take no further action in respect of a complaint” and “increase the statutory maximum number of Associate Judges of the High Court from six to nine.” As the Justice and Electoral Committee report of 18 May 2009 pointed out the amendments to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act are in part the result of recommendations by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. The Judicial Conduct Commissioner considered that these amendments will better achieve the stated purpose of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act. 
This bill is about ensuring there is public confidence in the system. It is about ensuring there is transparency it is about an important constitutional process and is a prudent reinforcement of our constitutional principles. I commend the bill to the House.