Judges Gone Wild, Part IV
The Judicial Conduct Panel has swatted away District Court Judge Ema Aitken’s latest bid to pin down a tidy legal threshold for what actually counts as “judicial misconduct” serious enough to remove a judge.
The panel essentially replied: lovely question, but ask us again once we’ve heard the evidence.
The panel’s line-up includes retired Court of Appeal Justice Brendan Brown KC, former Governor-General Sir Jerry Mateparae, and Court of Appeal Justice Jillian Mallon. They made it clear this definitional hand-wringing can only happen after the factual mess is aired at February’s two-week hearing.
Front and centre in that mess is the Northern Club incident, where Judge Aitken allegedly disrupted then-Deputy PM Winston Peters mid-speech during a New Zealand Party function that unfortunately ran alongside a function for His Majesty’s Judges. One of the key questions the panel will tackle is whether it is enough for misconduct that the Judge “ought to have known” she was interrupting the country’s second-most powerful politician?
Aitken’s legal team, compising David Jones KC, Deborah Manning and Simon Lamain, pushed for clarity at this week’s interlocutory hearing – seeking certainty on the standard that will be used to judge her behaviour, and on the point where a judge’s misstep becomes a sackable offence.
The panel’s response amounted to a judicial shrug – essentially saying we’ll tell you once the facts stop moving.
For now, the Aitken affair continues to blend constitutional seriousness with the faintly satifical smelling salts that come with political satire, all framed by that fateful night at the Northern Club when one judge’s social instincts collided with one politician’s need for undisturbed air.
Read more –
