Public comments by judges of their colleagues: an unhappy Australian episode

Matthew Nathan Groves

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

There are few formal or clear rules governing when and why judges may make
public statements outside their official duties. The conventions which govern
public statements by judges are general in nature and proceed upon the
assumption that judges can and should avoid controversial issues when they
speak publicly. That assumption does not anticipate instances where the issue
in question is about a fellow judge, or the very court on which a judge sits.
What can or should judges say when one of their colleagues or their own
court is what they wish to speak about? Can judges avoid controversy in such
cases? What should they do? This article examines those issues by reference
to the public statements made by many judicial officers during the
controversy about the appointment and tenure of the former Chief Justice of
Queensland, the Hon Timothy Carmody.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)98-128
Number of pages31
JournalThe Journal of Media Law
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Cite this