Judicial reform ‘once-in-a-generation opportunity’ – Bonnici

The reform in the appointments of the judiciary is a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity, according to Justice Minister Owen, and as such, any changes must be well-thought and enjoying the support of stakeholders.

The minister this evening kick started the debate on the judicial reform in parliament, paving the way for the setting up of a Judicial Appointments Commission, improvement in the judiciary’s working conditions and increased accountability.

The bill sets up a new commission for judicial appointments, made up of the Chief Justice, Attorney General and the President of the Chamber of Advocates, who will receive and evaluate expressions of interest in judicial posts. This Commission can also be asked to give its opinion on other judicial appointments.

Addressing parliament, Bonnici argued that it was no surprise that the reform was not undertaken by the previous administration due to the “sensitivity and fragility” it entails.

The anomaly in the removal of misbehaving members of the judiciary has also been addressed in the bill. Impeachment remains as a sanction, but other disciplinary proceedings have also been introduced, such as fines and suspension on half pay.
The retirement age of judges has been raised to 68 and a pension scheme for the judiciary and the Attorney General introduced. Retired judges and magistrates will be entitled to a pension after 15 years of service or a lesser sum pro-rata if they serve less.

In the run-up to the parliamentary discussion, the minister held meetings with various stakeholders, including the Chamber of Advocates, the Judiciary Association, almost all of the judges and magistrates and Law Faculty Dean Kevin Aquilina.

Bonnici also hailed the positive meetings held with shadow justice minister Jason Azzopardi.

“The appointment of a Judicial Appointments Commission is a once-in-a-generation opportunity,” Bonnici said, adding that such a reform should be accompanied by increased accountability and pension reform.

Improving the working conditions of the judiciary is also an electoral pledge of the Labour Party.

It is the government’s intention to develop ways – along with members of the judiciary – that would help monitor the efficiency of the judiciary without the need to create an additional authority.

The European Union, Bonnici explained, has a body that monitors the efficiency of the judiciary and, as such, the government would not be reinventing the wheel.

The minister argued that, on one hand, stakeholders argued that the appointments of the judiciary should remain as is; on the other, it was proposed that appointments should be fully handled by an independent commission.

“I have thus opted to meet these proposals halfway: let the government decided based on the advice of the advisory committee,” he said, adding that the government would refine the law if there were any loopholes.

Bonnici argued that, contrary to elected members of parliament, individuals holding Constitutional roles – such as the Attorney General and the Chief Justice – did not face the scrutiny of a general election.

“Giving unelected people the power to decide who can become magistrate or judge risks creating a new nucleus of power that is not accountable to the electorate,” he said.

Whilst highlighting the importance of carrying out the necessary due diligence on the nominees, the minister reiterated that the pool from which to choose members of the judiciary was small.

The minister expressed his disappointment at how two lawyers – Ingrid Zammit Young and Caroline Farrugia Frendo – had been “bullied” when the government announced their nomination to the bench.

Zammit Young eventually withdrew her nomination while Farrugia Frendo, the Speaker’s daughter, is on her way to be appointed magistrate.

Bonnici also proposed that individuals already holding a constitutional role – such as a magistrate set to become judge – should be first chosen by the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister himself approaches the commission for its advice.

“Can you imagine a magistrate submitting themself before the Attorney General and the president of the Chamber of Advocates for their approval?”

Bonnici emphasized that the Judicial Appointments Commission would base its advice on the eligibility and merit of the nominee.

Bill is ‘autocratic, unconstitutional and fake’ – Azzopardi

Shadow justice minister Jason Azzopardi slammed the Bill as being “autocratic, unconstitutional and fake”, making several references to critics of the Bill.

According to Azzopardi, the Bill was also “deceitful”.

The opposition, he added, was however in agreement with increasing the pensions of the judiciary and was in favour of disciplinary measures – but not those as proposed in the Bill.

He also argued that the Bill was unconstitutional, because it did not safeguard the independence of the members of the judiciary.

Azzopardi insisted that a prime minister should not be involved in the appointment of the judiciary and the Bill “flies in the face of the proposals made by the Bonello Commission”.

Azzopardi dedicated much of his speech to remind viewers of the controversy that surrounded the nominations of Zammit Young and Farrugia Frendo. He also referred to the appointment of magistrate Monica Vella, “where, for the first ever time, a sitting politician became a member of the judiciary”.