> Region: New Zealand > Category: People > Source: Kiwisfirst

Judicial Conduct Commissioner Ian Haynes Resigns

LawFuel - The Law Jobs and News Wire

The Kiwisfirst blog reports on Ian Haynes' resignation

The New Zealand Judicial Conduct Commissioner Ian Haynes abruptly resigned last week after 4 years at the post. Mr Haynes was appointed the country's first Judicial Conduct Commissioner for a three year term in 2005, but stayed on after his term expired. His resignation comes as a shock to New Zealand's legal community. Parliament is working to find a replacement.

Although the Judicial Conduct Commissioner Act 2004 requires the Commissioner continue until his successor is appointed, Mr Haynes left the country on 10 July 2009 and resigned two days later. His office stated today he is no longer available to deal with complaints against New Zealand Judges for alleged misconduct. The discrepancy between Haynes' resignation and the requirement of the position could not be reconciled by his secretary other than to say Mr Haynes had expressed his intent to resign some time ago.

The office of the JCC was established by Parliament as an independent oversight to set up panels to investigate prima facie cases of judicial misconduct. This was after the old system of referring judicial complaints to the Court Head of Bench was deemed ineffective due to internal court conflicts of interest and lack of independence.

Mr Haynes' term as JCC has been plagued with controversy. Of the more than 300 formal complaints he has received against New Zealand judges, Haynes failed to advance any to a panel investigation. Mr Haynes is a director and shareholder of at least 11 New Zealand companies, as well as an active partner in one of New Zealand's largest law firms, Kensington Swan. As such, his ability and willingness to address complaints of judicial misconduct with independence was widely challenged. His exodus comes as he was forced to address the Judicial misconduct complaint against Supreme Court Justice Bill Wilson for failing to disclose his conflict of interest in the Saxmere v Wool Board case. This complaint was part of a disturbing trend which saw 10 formal complaints last year against Supreme Court Judges alone.

Haynes last year dismissed the complaint against Judge Wilson, claiming he had no oversight authority because Wilson's failure to disclose was "a judicial decision", which is specifically exempted from oversight. University of Canterbury Law Professor and current Legal Complaints Review Officer Duncan Webb then made a detailed legal submission in favour of the complaint, exposing this as a false claim and forcing Haynes hand. Haynes responded by putting the Wilson complaint on hold due to the matter being a live issue before the Supreme Court. That was until the Supreme Court decision came down on 3 July.

Haynes left New Zealand a week after the Supreme Court ruled Judge Wilson had met his technical obligations of disclosure. Nonetheless, this Supreme Court decision exoneration of the Judge was problematic. The appeal exposed the extent of Wilson's undisclosed conflict, His Honour's admission that he intentionally concealed his conflict and the extent of the private commercial enterprise in which the Judge was engaged in separately from his Judicial post.

Comments

del.ici.ous Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon