The annual report of the Judicial Council in 2023 revealed that only one out of over 230 misconduct allegations lodged against judges in the preceding year was deemed suitable for review. The council committee, made up of 12 individuals including judges and lay members, will ascertain if the charge is suitable for informal settlement or deserves scrutiny by a trio comprised of two judges and a lay member.
The present stage of the procedure is protected under the Judicial Council Act that prohibits the disclosure of the judge under accusation. The framework for lodging complaints and adjudicating conduct began in October 2022, hence applicable grievances must pertain to conduct after this date.
The council’s registrar, Kevin O’Neill, found 16 out of the total 232 complaints received during the past year to be outside the remit of the Act and hence, excluded them from consideration. Because it had yet to decide on six charges from late 2022, the council was left with 222 complaints to evaluate in 2023. Of these, 196 were ruled inadmissible, one was admitted, two were withdrawn, and the remaining 23, arriving late in the year, were still pending. Over 60 requests to review the registrar’s inadmissibility rulings were obliged, but none succeeded in changing the outcomes.
Council Chair and Chief Justice Donal O’Donnell recognised that the majority of complaints came from disgruntled litigants challenging the results of their cases. This, he interpreted, showed a “profound confusion” about the reach and intent of the conduct regulation. In his preface to the annual report, he clarified that such misapprehensions did not constitute valid allegations of judicial misconduct. He reminded that existing procedures provide room to contest adverse judgments, as this role stands apart from the mandate of the conduct system.
Mr O’Neill noted that numerous rejections of various other grievances demonstrated consistent adherence to the judiciary’s stringent ethical expectations, a comparison to the abundant daily caseloads judges managed, he said. Regular concerns raised included the notion of judges appearing to favour one side over the other or failing to fully engage with a complainant’s argument, which he suggested was often due to a misunderstanding of the court proceedings, specifically, the adversarial nature of the judge’s role.
In 2023, beneficial legislative modifications the council had previously proposed were implemented, improving the review of judicial conduct by removing some obstacles to complaint consideration, he continued.
The sentencing guidelines and information committee, chaired by Ms Justice Iseult O’Malley of the Supreme Court, stated that the continued lack of appropriate and sufficient data on sentencing remained a barrier for creating sentencing guidelines for different offences, necessitating a fundamental overhaul of data collection. The committee highlighted two key areas for 2023: sentencing for manslaughter and domestic violence cases in the District Court, both of which can’t progress due to lack of substantial qualitative data.
Future judges will meet the need for such information by actively recording information themselves or gaining access to courts’ digital audio recording of sentences.
Further research facilitated the creation of guidelines on relationship violence, designating sentencing for causing death by dangerous driving as a top priority for the Circuit Court, she explained.
In March 2024, a mandated review of the judicially approved 2022 guidelines on reducing mainly minor personal injury rewards was concluded. The review results, carried out by the personal injuries guidelines committee of the council, haven’t been published.
Included in the report are descriptions of various judicial training and education initiatives run during the past year, topics ranging from social media awareness, unconscious bias, and trauma-informed practice.