Attorney General John Quigley confirms WA Judicial Commission bill being prepared for Parliament

Rogue judges accused of bad behaviour inside WA courts have been put on notice as the State Government moves to establish an independent watchdog to handle complaints against them. The Sunday Times can reveal government officials are drafting a Bill to establish a new judicial commission to investigate complaints made by the public, legal professionals or other judges against any magistrate or judge across the State. Attorney-General John Quigley would not confirm when the bill would be introduced to Parliament, but said it was on a long list of law reforms ahead of his retirement, and before WA heads to the polls in March next year. The independent body would be tasked with investigating allegations of improper or offensive behaviour, as well as bullying, and would be given powers to caution, counsel or even reprimand officials for their actions, according to the State’s chief lawmaker. “Presently, the only way to sanction a judicial officer is by way of a motion before both houses of Parliament moving for their dismissal,” Mr Quigley said. “This extreme measure is never used because of the difficulties, complexities and extreme outcome.” The move has been welcomed by the court’s most senior judge, Chief Justice Peter Quinlan SC, who said a commission would “greatly enhance” the justice system’s capacity to “properly and adequately” address the conduct of those in charge. He said a commission would also maintain confidence in the administration of justice. “The heads of jurisdiction of courts and tribunals in WA have long supported, and continue to support, the establishment of a properly resourced Judicial Commission in this State,” the chief justice said. The watchdog will fill the long-standing gap in oversight for WA judges. While current protocols mean WA Police handle criminal misconduct or suspected criminal behaviour, all other complaints are handled in-house by heads of individual courts. Those complaints are not tallied or publicised, and the only current public censure a judge in WA faces is from the Court of Appeal — which has capacity to comment on the behaviour of a judge if it affects an appeal. Top Perth lawyer Steven Penglis SC has long called for a judicial commission. He pointed to a State Administrative Tribunal decision which suspended a WA lawyer for an inappropriate relationship with a now-retired judge as another reason why WA needed an oversight body. Mr Penglis said while the counsel “paid a high price” for her part, the trial judge had since retired and was “probably enjoying a judicial pension”. The prominent lawyer welcomed news of the Bill but said he was concerned the commission would not have the capacity to deal with complaints about lengthy delays in the court. “If that is right, it will not address the greatest need for the Commission,” Mr Penglis said. NSW has had a judicial commission since 1986 and a handful of others have only moved to introduce them in the past decade. The Federal Government last year also canvassed the legal fraternity about the implementation of a national body, a matter in which Federal Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said there remained “continuing consultations” through the Standing Council of Attorneys-General. While it is unclear if former judges — those who have retired or quit the job — could be investigated as part of a Federal Judicial Commission, The Law Council of Australia has in the past advocated in favour of those powers.