All judges and magistrates must stand tall

The judiciary is in the news but for the wrong reasons, which certainly does no good to the administration of justice.

Details emerging from a libel case instituted by Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera against Daphne Caruana Galizia in the wake of comments the columnist made in her blogs have brought to the fore increasing concerns about the state of the judiciary. Regardless of the outcome of the libel case, it has brought the judiciary into disrepute and highlighted the urgent need for action.

Coming on top of the shocking cases of former Chief Justice Noel Arrigo and former Judge Patrick Vella, who had been found guilty together of accepting a bribe to reduce the jail term of a drug dealer, these cases have served to focus attention on the quality of the judiciary. They have highlighted questions about the selection of judges and magistrates, the procedure for removing bad apples and the whole question of how the judiciary should be held to account.

Ironically, this happens at a time when the members of the judiciary seem to be more focused on their wages and conditions of employment and the so-called Commission for the Administration of Justice being neither here nor there.

Franco Debono, a criminal lawyer and government member of Parliament, is campaigning for stricter criteria for the appointment of members of the judiciary and the means of holding them to account. This would include the speedy removal of those who failed to adhere to the highest standards of competence and behaviour, citing the practical difficulties of the impeachment procedures now in place.

The rule of law is vital to the successful workings of a democracy. The judiciary is the prime instrument in the exercise of the rule of law. The quality of those entrusted with that responsibility is crucial. When judges or magistrates are selected society has a right to expect that their selection is based on the highest professional and personal standards. They are expected to be professionally competent and experienced in the application of the law. But, above all, they must demonstrate high standards of personal behaviour and probity, be impartial, apolitical, objective and of excellent judgement.

On the whole, the country is well served by the judiciary. But more, clearly, needs to be done to ensure it gets the best and that those not up to the high standards required are weeded out. Under the Constitution, the appointment of judges and magistrates is in the hands of the President, acting always on the advice of the Prime Minister. Their selection is a task, therefore, very much in the gift of the Prime Minister. Has this system proved flawless?

The Commission for the Administration of Justice, which sits under the President, has the responsibility, inter alia, of advising on appointments to the judiciary “when requested by the Prime Minister” and supervising the workings of the justice system “and advising the Minister for Justice” as needed. In truth, however, this commission lacks teeth.

Before leaving office, the last Chief Justice, Vincent DeGaetano, had made a strong plea for the setting up of an independent body to look at the judicial system, to see what difficulties exist and to propose remedies. It is high time his excellent advice was heeded.

Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri raised the matter of delays in court proceedings and the lack of proper case management at the opening of the Forensic Year on Monday. His comments and advice too must be heard.