The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
1240/5(7154)
WRITTEN QUESTION TO H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL BY DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 23rd OCTOBER 2012
Question
What measures are in place should information come to light that a sitting Jurat has displayed a questionable commitment to justice (a commitment upon which the role revolves) and what powers, if any, exist to remove a Jurat from office?
Answer
This information has, in terms, already been provided in a previous answer tabled by the Attorney General on 25th September 2011:
The independence of the Jurats is secured by restrictions on their removal, at any rate without cause pursuant to Article 9 of the Royal Court (Jersey) Law 1948. It is only the Order of Her Majesty in Council on petition of the Superior Number of the Royal Court who may remove a Jurat from office. States Members have no role in that process. This security of tenure and freedom from external pressure from the legislature or executive is at the cornerstone of judicial independence and the good administration of justice.
Were a judge to display serious behaviour of a sort that was inconsistent with the discharge of his or her judicial office then, were that judge to seek to remain in office, it would be open to the Royal Court following an appropriate disciplinary inquiry to present a representation to Her Majesty in Council that such a judge should be removed from office.