Supreme Court Justice faces Judicial Conduct Panel
May 7th, 2010 at 1:24 pm by David FarrarThe Herald reports:
The Judicial Conduct Commissioner says there should be further investigation into the conduct of Supreme Court judge Justice Bill Wilson in the long running Saxmere wool case.
The commissioner, Sir David Gascoigne, has received three complaints about Justice Wilson’s conduct in the Saxmere wool case.
Today he said there was no basis for dismissing the case.
However, he said he was unable to take the matter any further in a preliminary examination, and recommended a Judicial Conduct Panel examine the issue.
The recommendation would go to the Attorney-General.
Justice Wilson, in a statement released shortly after the commissioner’s, said he intended to speak with the Chief Justice early next week.
I have no doubt the Acting Attorney-General (Judith Collins acts on this issue) will agree to set up a judicial conduct panel.
I think the time has come for Justice Wilson to resign and return to practising as a lawyer. The Judicial Conduct Panel would probably hear most evidence in public, and would be effectively a trial of the Judge. That would be a very painful process to go through for him. His comments about talking to the Chief Justice indicate he must be seriously considering this.
Related posts:
- Justice Wilson’s Judicial Conduct Panel
- Justice Wilson’s Judicial Conduct Panel
- Judicial Conduct Panel Proceedings
- Justice Wilson
May 7th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
QC Galbriaith also needs looking at for coming before a judge whilst chasing him for a substantial debt.
he did not disclose that both to the court nor to the plantiffs attorneys.
he has a responsibility as an officer of the court to protect the court from behaviour that could be seen to not be impartial.
He was not behaving as an officer of the court should and should be penalised too.
Vote:May 7th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Put the judge in the dock.
Vote:May 7th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Why should he be allowed to continue practising as a lawyer? The conflict of interest won’t suddenly go away – imho he shouldn’t be allowed to have anything to do with a court until the Panel has investigated.
Vote:May 7th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
The real miracle is that he hasn’t resigned already.
It really speaks to the degree that the judiciary are in a bubble that he thinks his position is remotely tenable.
Vote:May 7th, 2010 at 2:35 pm
AFAIK, High Court Judges (and Appeal and Supreme Court judges are deemed to be High Court judges) have to agree never to practice law again (presumably in NZ) when they cease being judges. I think this applies after a certain date only and have no idea where Wilson J would stand with respect to this (he rocketed through judicial ranks since original appointment). Therefore if Wilson J ceased as a judge his employment options could be very limited. Hence he is not going to resign in a hurry.
MikeNZ yes, Mr Galbraith could have always suggested that Wilson J recuse himself (ie not take the case).
MikeG – H cannot practice as a lawyer without applying for a practicing certificate. In the hypothetical case that he could practice, any conflict situations would need to be considered case by case which is what happens in lawyering every day.
Vote:May 7th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
The outspoken criticisms of a former Judge has really put this matter into the open. The problem is the integrity of the Court is suffering. This is against the background of the controversial circumstances the Court was set up in the first place. It is very distressing and raises some questions about the close relationships some senior Lawyers have with Judges. A large financial debt with a Judge I believe to be most unwise.
Vote:May 8th, 2010 at 6:49 am
This was one of the very good reasons to retain the Privy Council. NZ is too small a community for Judges and Barristers / QCs to ever have a truly impartial relationship. While Justice Wilson’s relationship with QC Galbraith is at one end of the spectrum, the truth is that these relationships are on a continuum, which even when remote by NZ standards would still be too close in deeper societies.
Vote:May 8th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
peterwyn
I thought that as an officer of the court it is incumbent on Mr Galbraith to inform the court that the Judge owed him a substantial sum of money and that he had been pressing him for it.
Duh!
As I haven’t heard anyone bring this up I intend to lay a complaint against him with the law society and Justice Wilson’s mate Chris Finlayson or whichever official office will deal with this.
At the very least I would expect an enquiry and a fine or somesuch for abriogating his responsibility towards the court being seen as unfettered and impartial.
If the opposition lawyers knew of the indebtedness then they too could be said to have left an option for appeal on the table and should be looked at too.
Why does no one else see this here?
Vote:Do you see what I am driving at?
May 8th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Mike…If you want the whole sordid story go to the ‘Kiwis first’website. Wilson had many political friends in Labour and it seems the lawyer who exposed him was sacked from her position on the Conservation Department for so doing.
Vote:May 9th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
freedom 101 makes a good point. I don’t actually think Wilson would have needed to recuse himself but he certainly had to make the potential conflict plain as day to avoid the perception of bias. And as freedom 101 notes it is bloody hard to not have some potential for conflict in a country this small. Sadly the promise of overseas judges sitting on the SC seems to have come to nothing as well.
FES or Graeme might know but I am pretty sure he would need leave of some sort to return to practice as a lawyer if he resigned.
Vote:May 9th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
What would be the pension for Wilson J if he resigned?
And is it still tax-free?
Vote: