BEHIND CLOSED DOORSAbout two dozen magistrates are removed annually from the judicial list by the Office for Judicial Complaints. The original complaints can come from any number of directions; members of the public, colleagues or various legal authorities. There are numerous acts of commission or omission which can lead to erasure……some are obvious……lying on the application form or to the interviewing panel, failing to sit the minimum number of times required annually, behaving in a manner that brings the office of magistrate into disrepute are just some. I have commented here more than once. Being associated with law breakers is not such a clear example. One feature of the process is common to all complaints; the investigation is carried out behind closed doors. The rights of the “defendant” are not public knowledge as far as I know although I will be happy to be corrected on this. What and who constitute the panel in judgement? What level of proof is required? What representation is available to the accused? Is a full transcript of the hearing{s} available and to whom? There are many other unanswered questions because the whole process is conducted in secrecy. I can easily imagine that some of those involved will relish that secrecy but generally there are always suspicions concerning secret tribunals of any kind.

A member of the West Sussex Bench, Sarah McDonagh was last month removed from office. A single issue website has highlighted the story. Whilst the very rare occasion when a judge is removed will make headline news most decisions cause nary a ripple. Other regulatory organisations eg the General Medical Council and the Law Society in days not so far gone by were very reticent about their disciplinary procedures and processes. It would seem appropriate that the Office for Judicial Complaints offered a public window to its processes.