Move to exclude ‘good old boys’
Verity Edwards and Pia Akerman: The Australian | August 18, 2008
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24197096-601,00.html
IF it weren’t for political intervention, the legal fraternity would appoint only “good old boys” to the judiciary, at the expense of women, non-Christians and members of ethnic minorities.
In an escalating dispute between South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson and the legal fraternity, he told The Australian the state Government would continue to appoint judges, crushing hopes for an independent board to handle the appointments.
“I really don’t think religious minorities, be they Jewish, Muslim, Orthodox, Hindu, Sikh or others, would have much chance under the system of a judicial appointments committee, because they would be turned down on most occasions on the grounds they are not the most meritorious appointment,” Mr Atkinson said.
“It would be argued there is always a good old boy more deserving. The only way broader consideration would come into judicial appointments is because the Government appoints them – otherwise it would be a closedshop.”
The Law Society of South Australia has called for an independent board, arguing that the Government had failed to maintain national standards by refusing to create independent bodies for law reform and police integrity, and an independent commission against corruption.
Funding is in place to appoint three extra District Court judges, one by the end of this month and two next financial year. It is hoped the additional judges will help clear a backlog of trials.
But prominent Adelaide lawyer Lindy Powell QC said the views of the Government on appointing women had been “slow-moving”.
There are 55 men and 22 women holding positions in the supreme, district and magistrates courts in South Australia.
“The consciousness of the need to have women properly represented on the judiciary, I think those views have developed about as quickly in government as they have on the bench,” Ms Powell said.
“I think the views of government are mirrored in the views of the judiciary.
“I don’t think it (an independent board) would have made any difference, quite frankly.”
She rejected claims the legal fraternity pushed for “boys’ club” appointments. Regardless of who appointed the judiciary, it was imperative to have wide consultation to appoint on merit.
Ms Powell supported forming an independent body to appoint judges and magistrates.
Law Society of South Australia Criminal Justice Committee chairman George Mancini said Mr Atkinson had misunderstood the calls for independence.
“I didn’t think affirmative action was an approach to an appointment,” Mr Mancini said. “I thought it was merit-based.”
Comment:
Affirmative action in the US has led to the appointment of incompetents in all manner of positions and the legitimizing of anti-White prejudices amongst non-Whites and self-hating Whites.
Why repeat the errors of another nation? Perhaps because the Attorney General, Michael Atkinson, is also the Minister for Multicultural Affairs and allows his connections through that position to influence his actions as SA’s Attorney General. As I have pointed out before, this is a case of conflict of interests and the Attorney General/Minister for Multicultural Affairs should be immediately dismissed from his position and a full inquiry should ensue. But as we already know, neither the media nor parliamentary opposition will raise this issue as it would reveal some of the serious flaws in their holier than thou dogma of multiculturalism.
Cailen.