Dangerous O'Farrell magistrate campaign

Premier O’Farrell’s campaign against Magistrate Pat O’Shane represents a threat to the independence of the judiciary in NSW. In the Sun-Herald of February 5, 2012, he is reported to say: “The police need to have confidence the judiciary is supporting them in keeping our streets safe”. As well, the Sun-Herald said: “Mr O’Farrell has left the Judicial Commission in no doubt the state government will be watching its decision closely”.

However, political leaders cannot direct the Judicial Commission, and neither is it the duty of the judiciary to “support” the police. Rather the judiciary is to independently administer the laws passed by the parliament. The alternative is a rubber stamp judiciary and a police state.

In the Sydney Morning Herald (Feb 8, 2012), two former ambulance officers, reacting to the disputed Wililo case involving an alleged assault on an ambulance worker, demand that Magistrate O’Shane retire to ‘protect her dignity’. Yet their own article demonstrated that between 1999 and 2011, Magistrate O’Shane would have dealt with 39,000 cases, of which 56 cases were appealed to the Supreme Court.

They provide no data on other magistrates, but doubtless, all of them face appeals against some of their decisions. Magistrate O’Shane’s record seems unremarkable, until one notes that she has been the object of attack by elements of the NSW police for two decades.

She is the subject of a political campaign, and deserves the support of the citizens of NSW.
It is important to note that the appropriate response for people who disagree with Magistrate O’Shane’s decision on the Wililo case is to seek an appeal.

The Judicial Commission does not act on complaints which can be dealt with by appeal.
When the Judicial Commission did investigate Magistrate O’Shane in 2006 in relation to a case where she had a person put into custody for contempt of court (the Makucha case), it found in her favour.

On February 7, the NSW Bar Association issued a statement: “The Premier’s statements to the effect that police and ambulance officers should have the support of the court system when assault charges are laid do not accurately reflect the role of the courts. The courts exist to determine matters on the evidence before them without fear or favour, not to support any particular group within society. …The Association urges the Government to exercise caution in its public statements concerning judicial officers, as its recent statements have been couched in terms that undermine public confidence in our system of justice and the rule of law.”