The working conditions of the judiciary, including their pay, have to improve but changes should also be accompanied by better performance and greater accountability, according to the head of the Chamber of Advocates.
“Grievances held by judges and magistrates are valid but the weaknesses of the system also have to be addressed,” Reuben Balzan, lawyer and chamber president, said when asked about discontent among members of the judiciary.
A number of judges and magistrates are angry about their working conditions and salaries, including the lack of support staff. Some members of the judiciary have anonymously voiced their dissatisfaction with the conditions, with one judge telling The Times they are treated like “non-entities”.
When contacted for comment, the head of the judiciary’s association, Judge Joseph Azzopardi was reluctant to speak to the media.
A no-show by the whole body of the judiciary for the September 8 and Independence Day celebrations on September 21 appeared to be their way of showing disapproval about how they are being treated.
It was only Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri who attended the two national events. But he too declined to comment about the absence of his colleagues. “I was invited and I attended,” he told The Times, noting that attendance was not obligatory. Dr Balzan insisted any improvements to the conditions of the judiciary had to come hand in hand with improvements in performance and accountability.
“The vast majority of judges and magistrates perform well but a handful do not perform. Some take years to deliver judgments and this is unfair on people who expect justice to be delivered in a reasonable time.” It would be wrong to change one aspect of the system, he added, without approaching the matter in a holistic manner.
As things stood today, Dr Balzan said, members of the judiciary could not be disciplined if they neglected their duties. He described as ridiculous a situation where the only effective way of disciplining a judge or magistrate was by removing him or her through a two-thirds vote in Parliament.
“Today it is either no discipline or impeachment, which is ridiculous. While preserving the judiciary’s total independence we might have to change the way how the Commission for the Administration of Justice works to enable it to discipline members of the judiciary.”
But Dr Balzan also called for a revision of the whole system at the law courts, including the introduction of a common diary system to avoid having lawyers not turn up because of conflicting cases.
“A holistic approach is needed because sometimes it is also lawyers who are to blame for delays or postponements,” he said.
Dr Balzan’s views were also reflected by his predecessor Andrew Borg Cardona, who insisted that the judiciary should be treated with the highest respect.
“We should pull the judiciary out of the ordinary pay scales and in turn it would be legitimate to expect an adequate return in terms of behaviour and performance,” Dr Borg Cardona said.
For lawyer Emmanuel Mallia the problems highlighted now have been present for years and he insisted it was about time the pay packets of the judiciary were revised upwards.
“Having good incentives, proper support structures and a professional work environment will contribute to a more productive judiciary,” he said.