❓ Hon Giz Watson inquired about the progress of establishing a formal system for handling complaints against judicial officers. The Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011.
AnsweredQoN 1100Legislative Council
Asked
29 November 2011
Member
Portfolio
parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General
QuestionView source ↗
STANDING COMMITTEE OF ATTORNEYS-GENERAL — JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS HANDLING
I refer to the answer given on 21 September 2010 to part (3) of my question on notice 2721, which indicated that the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General was likely to be in receipt in 2011 of a report and recommendation from its working group on judicial complaints handling. Will the minister please provide full details of the progress SCAG has made since 21 September 2010 on establishing a formal system for dealing with complaints made against judicial officers? Hon DONNA FARAGHER
I refer to the answer given on 21 September 2010 to part (3) of my question on notice 2721, which indicated that the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General was likely to be in receipt in 2011 of a report and recommendation from its working group on judicial complaints handling. Will the minister please provide full details of the progress SCAG has made since 21 September 2010 on establishing a formal system for dealing with complaints made against judicial officers? Hon DONNA FARAGHER
AnswerView source ↗
On behalf of the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General, I provide the following response. At the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting on 4 and 5 March 2011, held in Wellington, New Zealand, ministers agreed to consider establishing mechanisms for judicial complaints handling in their jurisdiction, noting that some jurisdictions already have mechanisms in place; and agreed to remove this item from the SCAG agenda. In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: On behalf of the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General, I provide the following response. At the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting on 4 and 5 March 2011, held in Wellington, New Zealand, ministers agreed to consider establishing mechanisms for judicial complaints handling in their jurisdiction, noting that some jurisdictions already have mechanisms in place; and agreed to remove this item from the SCAG agenda. In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
On behalf of the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General, I provide the following response. At the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting on 4 and 5 March 2011, held in Wellington, New Zealand, ministers agreed to consider establishing mechanisms for judicial complaints handling in their jurisdiction, noting that some jurisdictions already have mechanisms in place; and agreed to remove this item from the SCAG agenda. In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: On behalf of the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General, I provide the following response. At the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting on 4 and 5 March 2011, held in Wellington, New Zealand, ministers agreed to consider establishing mechanisms for judicial complaints handling in their jurisdiction, noting that some jurisdictions already have mechanisms in place; and agreed to remove this item from the SCAG agenda. In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
On behalf of the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General, I provide the following response. At the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting on 4 and 5 March 2011, held in Wellington, New Zealand, ministers agreed to consider establishing mechanisms for judicial complaints handling in their jurisdiction, noting that some jurisdictions already have mechanisms in place; and agreed to remove this item from the SCAG agenda. In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
In terms of Western Australia’s consideration of a system for handling complaints against judicial officers, the Attorney General referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission in June 2011 with the following terms of reference — The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is to examine and report upon whether, and if so in what manner, the principles, practices and procedures pertaining to complaints or allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity against State judicial officers in Western Australia require reform and the responses to any such conduct, and in particular giving close consideration to: (i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(i) the need to protect and preserve the independence and impartiality of State courts from the executive and legislative branches of government; (ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(ii) the benefits of establishing a system for dealing with such complaints and allegations that is efficient, accessible, transparent and accountable; (iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(iii) the need to ensure that any system for dealing with such complaints and allegations is suited to the conditions in Western Australia, having regards to the number of serving State judicial officers and the number of complaints or allegations warranting investigation that may be expected to arise; (iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(iv) the need to develop standardised and consistent procedures when dealing with such complaints, thus reducing the potential for allegations of bias to be made in relation to procedures which are developed after the complaint or allegation is made; and (v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
(v) the recent establishment of judicial complaints systems in other jurisdictions both nationally and internationally. The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
The commission was also asked to report upon the adequacy of, and on any desirable changes to, the existing principles, practices and procedures in relation thereto.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.