No announcement yet.

Judicial Conduct Commissioner rules Judge went to far


  • Judicial Conduct Commissioner rules Judge exceeded authority

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Judge David Mc Naughton.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	15.7 KB
ID:	24751
    Complaints have been upheld against District Court Judge David McNaughton for ordering journalists reporting on Kim Dotcom’s first court appearances , to leave the court. One of the journalists was from the National Business Review, the other from the Herald on Sunday.

    In what is believed to be an unprecedented finding, Judicial Conduct Commissioner Sir David Gascoigne has referred complaints from two journalists about the judge to Chief District Court Judge Jan-Marie Doogue, for her attention.
    This means the journalists’ complaints are now a matter for “internaladministration” by Chief Judge Doogue and they cannot expect to be told of any outcome. Sir David says a result of his referral of the complaints to Chief District Court Judge Doogue could be a reinforcement, in the minds of Judges, of the significance of the courts being open to the media and the public generally – except where an explicitly statutory exception shouldprevail”.

    In his formal finding, Sir David says he came to the view Judge McNaughton’s behaviour was “somewhat peremptory and lacking in tolerance”.While Sir David made allowance for it being an unusual and highly charged situation, he said, if anything, “that might be thought to require a greater level of tolerance”.

    Sir David referred to the official Guidelines for Judicial Conduct which state judges should conduct themselves with courtesy to all and “punctuality, patience and tolerance are qualities the judge should apply”.
    “Overall, I have concluded that the Judge’s behaviour in these circumstances was significantly less courteous, patient and tolerant than may reasonably have been expected of a Judge,”

    Sir David said none of the nine circumstances in which he must dismiss a complaint applied.
    Sir David says there was no basis on which he could recommend to the Attorney-General that a Judicial Conduct Panel be appointed (as happened the complaint against former Supreme Court Justice Bill Wilson) because Judge McNaughton’s conduct did not warrant such an inquiry.

    In January, when Mr Dotcom and three co-accused business associates appeared in North Shore district court, after an armed police dawn raid, Judge McNaughton ordered media from the court, but allowed the public to remain while other matters were being dealt with. A National Business Review journalist and a Herald on Sunday journalist complained to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner essentially on similar grounds that Judge McNaughton overreacted badly in ordering media out of the court.

    In his response to the complaints, Judge McNaughton said he “requested” the media to leave. But the journalists were adamant he made a judicial order, which was enforced by court security staff and police.
    Because the views of the journalists and the Judge were significantly divergent, Sir David spoke to some lawyers who were present in court at the relevant times.
    While they sympathised with the courtroom situation the judge found, some stated that Judge McNaughton over-stepped the mark in dealing with things in a peremptory fashion and should have explained his position more carefully.

    (credit: Post based on paid content licenced by NBR)

    • Shannon
      Shannon commented
      Editing a comment
      I have a current complaint in about the actions of this Judge. I believe he should not be allowed to Judge anything! He is corrupt and has no respect for the guidlines and laws he is meant to be following.
    Posting comments is disabled.

Latest Articles


  • Judge Goddard Shipped to United Kingdom for Inquiry
    by courtwatcher
    Official comments from the United Kingdom lauding the appointment of New Zealand High Court Justice Lowell Goddard to head an Inquiry into broad child sexual abuse have legal doyens in New Zealand privately scratching their heads. Goddard J scored dead last in the 2014 poll of New Zealand judges last year, with many lawyers extremely critical of Lowell’s opportunistic public stances, liberties with the truth and contrarian judgments. But let us not be burdened by the empirical truth when we sho...
    05-02-2015, 12:27 PM
    by admin

    Transparency International New Zealand posted a news story on Voxy yesterday stating its "emergent overall findings" into its "National Integrity Systems review" "found that high standards of independence, integrity and accountability were generally met, although areas for improvements were noted. New Zealand also scores highly for fiscal transparency." The story states a further report will be provided in July, with the full report concluding August 27th. The public are invited...
    14-05-2013, 02:50 PM
  • Judges push Parliament to protect them
    by admin
    New Zealand Judges have ganged up to push Parliament into considering legislation which gives them greater privacy, stating criticism of judges - what they called "unwarranted and improper attack" - is increasing on internet sites; adding complaints to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, while "appropriate in principle", are frequently being used "essentially to harass judges". Eight judges, including the Chief Justice and Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, expressly endorsed the submissions t...
    25-04-2013, 11:14 AM
  • Shake up for judges mooted
    by admin
    Judges are facing the biggest overhaul of accountability in decades, with the Cabinet considering legal changes that would compel the judiciary to publish annual reports, bring transparency to judicial appointments and attempt to stem criticism washing up against the bench. The changes being considered by ministers today will see the 115-year-old Judicature Act updated to modernise a branch of state that has come under fire from some.

    A Herald-DigiPoll survey has found 53 per cent...
    15-04-2013, 10:07 AM
  • Attack by Family Court judges force Government backdown
    by admin
    The Government has backed down from radical Family Court changes which would have banned lawyers from acting in the early stages of disputes over the care of children. The proposed changes, designed to save $15 million a year, have been slammed as "unsafe" in an outspoken submission by Family Court judges. Principal Family Court Judge Laurence Ryan, on behalf of the full Family Court Bench, said a proposal to ban lawyers until the final stages of parental disputes would drive parents into more...
    07-04-2013, 10:10 AM
  • Litigants without lawyers biggest problem facing the Family Court
    by admin

    Current proposals with the select committee considering the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill include a compulsory $900 family dispute service, axing counselling sessions and restricting access to legal representation for parents and children. Judge Laurence Ryan is the new principal Family court Judge and he is concerned about changes to legal aid - meaning dozens more litigants without lawyers .
    Ryan was appointed to the bench in 1996 - he has a strong interest in case ...
    25-03-2013, 08:07 PM