The second comprehensive survey and ranking of New Zealand judges is now public!
Kiwisfirst published its first survey in 2010, at that time encompassing 62 judges of the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. That survey was an astounding success, perhaps demonstrating the Crown’s official line that judges’ backgrounds, company involvements and personal interests are not relevant to their official duties is a position not shared by many. It has become the “go to” resource for lawyers and the broader public in New Zealand, and a novelty for pundits abroad.
That judges are appointed in secret in New Zealand, by one man (the Attorney General), and efforts are routinely made to immediately erase their legal histories and club involvements as lawyers from the internet, only underscores the value of such a survey and the public quest for this information on these public wielders of significant government power.
This year, sixty-three judges in total were ranked, based upon their melded average score of four factors, on a scale of 1 to 10; perceived intelligence, fairness, knowledge of law and personal character. Lawyers and court observers were also free to provide comment on the individual judges. Six judges appointed within the past six months were not included in the survey but are nonetheless listed.
Supreme Court Justice Sian Elias was the highest overall scorer at 8.4, with Wellington High Court Justice Lowell Goddard pulling in last place with 6.5. This year’s survey produced some interesting results. Although women comprised 14 of the 63 judges, they took the two top and two bottom spots in the ratings. Three of the top ten judges are women. As with the 2010 survey, respondents generally perceive the women judges more fair and the men judges more proficient in the law.
The results indicate talent and fairness do not necessary increase with appearances up the court hierarchy. Although the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court sat atop of the rankings, her closest benchmate was 12th and the new Supreme Court appointee Mark O’Regan was a sad 48th. Increasingly, lawyers seem disappointed with rulings coming out of the Supreme Court and are attributing the poor rulings to personal failings of the jurists.
Individual mentions beyond the kudos for Elias CJ, go out to Ailsa Duffy J, who all lawyers seem impressed by, Rhys Harrison J, who scored dead last in perceived fairness, and Hannah Sargisson AJ, who scored dead last in perceived ability.
Generally speaking, judicial independence was regularly raised as a concern, as was the lack of specialist legal knowledge and diversity.
Respondents were more cynical concerning our judges and their motives compared to the 2010 survey responses. Lawyers were also more reluctant this year to express their views out of fear they might be targeted, mindful of lawyers being recently prosecuted for publicly expressing such views – the most public example of oppression was against New Zealand’s most senior Queen’s Counsel two years ago, after it was reported he considered lack of judicial skills was resulting in some rulings so poor they might be considered fraudulent in other countries.
Download the 2014 Judge Survey Results.
