The president of the Chamber of Advocates said this morning that it was wrong to equate the issue over the pay raise to the members of the judiciary with the current economic situation.
Speaking before 18 judges and 15 magistrates (and in the presence of President George Abela and the Minister of Justice) during the opening of the Forensic Year at the Law Courts, Dr Reuben Balzan said he disagreed with the argument that the members of the judiciary should not receive a pay raise because of the current economic situation.
"This is a simplistic and dangerous argument which makes the work of a judge look like some ordinary job.
"The appointment of a judge is not an ordinary job and that is why the Constitution includes provisions to prevent interference in the work of the judiciary, including political interference," Dr Balzan said.
(It was reported over the weekend that the Labour Party is disagreeing with proposals by the government to raise the salary of judges by some €12,000.)
Dr Balzan insisted that the members of the judiciary should be adequately compensated for their work because the judiciary was one of the pillars of a democratic society.
To argue in simplistic terms was wrong and dangerous and sent the wrong message to the public and the judges, he stressed.
He insisted that political agreement should be reached and the necessary funds should be sourced, in the national interest.
ACCOUNTABILITY
Dr Balzan said the Chamber had always argued that improving the conditions of the judiciary should come with greater accountability.
To date the only way to exercise discipline was through the Commission for the Administration of Justice, which lacked teeth. It could only issue a warning/reprimand which could be ignored without consequence, or else a magistrate of judge could be impeached by Parliament. The Justice Ministry was working on Constitutional amendments to fill the void between these two extremes, he said, and the Chamber would be submitting its own proposals - guided by the principle that one should not touch the autonomy and independence of the judiciary.