According to the Republican, Judges in the state are going to be evaluated on their performance.
Some of the dimension to be covered in this evaluation include, the judge's knowledge of the law, temperament on the bench, treatment of citizens, witnesses, jurors and attorneys, and timeliness on issuing opinions. The State Legislature mandated this evaluation in the 1990's and the result are confidential. The results are given to the judges being evaluated and to the respective Chief Justices. The first evaluation was done in 2004.
All of this sounds wonderful, finally accountability on Public Officials. However, I have several questions involving this process.
First, if the evaluation process was mandated by the State Legislature in the 1990's, why did it take four years to actually conduct the evaluation? Is this me, or does this sound like Government bureaucracy dragging their feet?
Second, Where are the average citizens included in this process? We need input from the average citizen
Third, Why are the results confidential??
Now, before I hear about the Judge's right to personnel file privacy, let me remind you that Judges go into public service willingly, and therefore, their privacy is to an extend reduce. During the appointment process we need to hear any potential conflict of private nature that may influence the judge or any issue with regards to character. Often times these issues cross into privacy issues. Finally, I am the employer of the judge, I pay his salary with my taxes, and so you too are the Judge's employer and pay his salary with your taxes, so Why can't we hear the results?
Making the results public will not, in my opinion intimidate the judges into issuing an opinion according to the public view, after all, judges are appointed and can only be removed by the Governor only in cases of bad behavior. "Shall hold their office during good behavior...the Governor may remove them upon the address of both houses of the legislature...) Massachusetts Constitution Article XCVIII ( 98) , Article 1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I have been in the presence of very few judges. A few for jury duty, and one for a small claims case. Out of all those, one was ripping everyones head off. Maybe he was having a bad day...who knows. However, in hindsight he still made the right decision. It must be tough dealing with all the lying and nit picking that goes on in a court room. They are sifting through bullsh** all day. I don't care if a judge tells you you're a jerk if you are (lawyers included).
There should absolutely be an evaluation done, but by the public...I don't think so. The average Joe wouldn't know what the heck they were looking at.
As a nurse, I wouldn't want a group of patients to judge me on how friendly, timely, or knowledgeable I was. Certainly their input is fine, but other healthcare personnel might be more accurate in judging my performance.
Also, the only result that should be made public should be "YOU'RE FIRED". If the public knows too much about a judge's issues...then there will be "I DON"T WANT THAT JUDGE TO DECIDE MY CASE BECAUSE..." issues. LISA
Good points Victor!
The reason it isnt posted is because even if he passes in his questioning he's bound to say something that lets onto bias in one way or something that could come up in court that could be later thrown back in his face and used against him.
Before you jump on all these judges, (and i do say some of them deserve it) make sure you know what youre really upset about.
Post a Comment