Abstract:
There is a reason that the Iliad and other such stories from Ancient Greek mythology hold an instinctive appeal thousands of years on. There is something intriguing about the stories where all powerful beings interact with humans on the same level and suffer the same trials and tribulations of mere mortals. It is for this reason that there has been such interest in the accusations of misconduct by Justice Wilson of the Supreme Court. Considering the role judges have in our society there is little as interesting as seeing judges tested against the principles they strive to uphold.
Every few years a case appears in the courts of New Zealand that is welcomed by academics as a practical look at legislation that has yet to be tested. The three Saxmere cases and the issues that arose from them is one of those occurrences. This one collection of cases has allowed for the first proper test run of the recently established process for handling allegations of judicial misconduct. The Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004 (The Judicial Conduct Act) had until now not dealt with any serious complaints, being legislated only recently.The Saxmere saga has provided the chance to analyse whether the processes in New Zealand to deal with judicial misconduct work effectively. This paper will consider what lessons have been learned by the handling of allegations of misconduct against Justice Wilson.
