Two complaints against sa国际传媒 provincial court judges were investigated in 2021, according to the latest annual report from the court.
The court received 211 complaints for that year, down from 230 the previous year and a significant drop from the 352 in 2017, said the report covering 2021-22. The document was released by Chief Judge Melissa Gillespie.
None of those who were subject of complaints are named.
The report said one complaint was about a comment a judge publicly posted on Facebook regarding a meme. The complainant asserted the comment was inappropriate and raised some concerns about the judge’s impartiality.
Investigators reached out to the judge, who, the report said, was “extremely open to the concerns raised and committed themselves to take steps to address them.”
The judge “apologized, expressing their embarrassment and sincere regret over making the comment, confirmed that they had immediately deleted the comment in question, and committed to refrain from such conduct in the future.”
The judge also completed a review of judicial education materials regarding ethics and social media, and participated in a judicial education webinar.
In the second case, a complaint arose from the scheduling of a criminal matter.
The complainant said the judicial case manger (JCM) was not answering their phone or responding to any of the voice messages left by the complainant’s lawyer regarding setting a hearing date.
Investigators reached out to the JCM, who “provided a detailed response which appeared to fully answer the concerns expressed in the complainant’s letter,” the report said.
The JCM said they had been on holiday during the time period in question; however, the investigation showed the JCM was in contact with the lawyer about setting dates prior to their absence.
Further, the report said, there was no record available to indicate that the complainant or their lawyer had phoned or left messages with the JCM’s office during the JCM’s absence.
A review of the complaint, the JCM’s response and the circumstances around the matter led to the conclusion that the JCM had not acted in a manner that could fairly be considered judicial misconduct, the report said.
“The complainant was provided with a reporting letter and the matter was closed on that basis.”
