Judges in North Carolina, by and large, are public servants of great integrity. But not always.
Charlotte-area residents dont have to look far to know that. Take former Mecklenburg District Court Judge Bill Belk, who was banned from ever serving as a judge again after the Supreme Court found he demonstrated willful misconduct in office. Or former Mecklenburg Judge John Totten, who was censured, accused of throwing out a drunken-driving defendants alcohol level so the man would receive softer punishment than the law requires. Or former Judge Tim Smith, who was reprimanded twice by the Judicial Standards Commission for trying to help his sister in court and for berating prosecutors trying cases against his wife.
Nothing is more essential to a well-functioning judicial system than the morality and incorruptibility of judges and, importantly, the publics belief in that. Thats why Gov. Pat McCrory should veto legislation currently sitting on his desk that undercuts the reliable system that now holds judges accountable.
House Bill 652 adds a new level of secrecy to proceedings against judges, and politicizes an approach that has operated in an effective and nonpartisan way for years. And how it was snuck through on the final day of the legislative session raises questions about its backers motivations.
• Makes private certain proceedings against judges that are currently public;
• Takes away the Judicial Standards Commissions ability to publicly reprimand judges and gives Supreme Court justices all power over disciplining judges;
• Forces Supreme Court justices to pass judgment on a Supreme Court colleague if one is accused of wrongdoing.
The Judicial Standards Commission receives about 300 complaints about judges each year. The vast majority are investigated and dismissed. When the commission pursues a case or settles with a judge by issuing a public reprimand, the proceedings are public. That engenders public trust. It would end under this legislation, and the handling of all complaints would remain confidential unless the Supreme Court made them public.
The bill also creates a potential conflict of interest for Supreme Court justices, who would essentially be put in the position of disciplining themselves. Currently, a justice facing charges has his case decided by the six most senior Court of Appeals judges.
Chief Judge John Martin of the Court of Appeals is the chairman of the Judicial Standards Commission. He wrote to legislators that the bill will create potential conflicts of interest within our judiciary and muddle the transparency and availability of public records related to judicial misconduct.
Twenty-nine past presidents of the N.C. Bar Association including registered Republicans, Democrats and independents wrote McCrory a letter this week unanimously urging him to veto the bill. The Bar has never before urged a governors veto.
A unanimous Supreme Court created the rules in 2006 and the system has worked well. This is another instance of fixing something that isnt broken, apparently to benefit a few over the public at large.
The bill passed narrowly, over bipartisan opposition and by far less than a veto-proof majority. The governor should veto it immediately.
The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.
Have a news tip? You can send it to a local news editor; email email@example.com to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Charlotte Observer.Read moreRead less