My Take | Judicial accountability must not cost its independence
- The dramatic rise in complaints against judges is a symptom of the political divide. But politics must have no place in the system that will make the final decisions
Complaints against judges in Hong Kong have soared as the courts process hundreds of politically charged cases arising from anti-government protests in 2019.
Almost 99 per cent of these complaints follow orchestrated campaigns involving identical allegations, many accusing a judge or magistrate of bias. Both political camps have played this game. The attacks are mostly unjustified. Four magistrates have been cleared of bias after investigations.
But the judiciary, buffeted by fierce criticism of its judgments in sensitive cases, is taking the complaint process seriously. It is right to do so. Judges are not above public scrutiny. The judiciary must be transparent and accountable if it is to maintain its credibility.
In the latest move, revealed on Friday, the judiciary proposes a new complaints system for later this year. Members of the public would, for the first time, be involved. There is nothing wrong with this in principle. But care must be taken to ensure that judicial independence is upheld.
The two-tier system would first involve a panel of judges investigating complaints that are serious, complex or a matter of public concern. The panel would make recommendations for resolving complaints with the help of the leaders of relevant courts. This is similar to the existing process.
But their findings would then be considered by a newly established advisory committee comprising judges and members of the public. That committee would be chaired by the chief justice and provide him with advice on how to handle each complaint. The chief justice would make the final decision.
