If serious misconduct is suspected, the JCC can recommend that the Attorney-General appoint a Judicial Conduct Panel to investigate that judge<\/a> \u2013 a rare move.<\/p>\n The current commissioner is Alan Ritchie \u2013 a former lawyer who was appointed in 2015 by then Governor-General Sir Jerry Mateparae on the recommendation of Parliament.<\/p>\n The vast majority of the complaints were dismissed \u2013 some rejected due to lack of evidence, others because judges are often targeted with hundreds of complaints from \u201cvexatious litigants\u201d.<\/p>\n Just 116 were deemed credible and referred to the heads of their respective courts for further action<\/a>.<\/p>\n Some judges then offered formal apologies, others were reminded of expected standards by their court\u2019s head judge and others had to attend additional training.<\/p>\n The JCC was established in 2005, with the goals of enhancing public confidence in the judicial system and \u201cprotecting the impartiality and integrity of the judicial system\u201d.<\/p>\n The office is only charged with considering complaints about conduct. It has no jurisdiction to review decisions judges make in court cases.<\/p>\n In the most serious cases, the commissioner has the power to recommend to the Attorney-General the creation of a three-person Judicial Conduct Panel.<\/p>\n The panel is then charged with investigating and reporting to the Attorney-General over whether the judge should be removed.<\/p>\n This only happens rarely \u2013 just two panels have been recommended in five years.<\/p>\n Those include the alleged conduct of Judge Ema Aitken<\/a> after an incident at the exclusive Northern Club in Auckland, where she was accused of disrupting a New Zealand First function. The investigation found the removal of Judge Aitken was not justified and she kept her job as a District Court judge.<\/p>\n And in the 2019-20 financial year, it was recommended a panel look into the conduct of then Coroner Sarn Herdson<\/a>. She denied any wrongdoing and resigned shortly after the panel was confirmed.<\/p>\n 2024-25: Judge offers \u2018unreserved apology\u2019 for courtroom dialogue<\/p>\n The JCC\u2019s annual report to July 31, 2025 showed there had been 253 complaints relating to the alleged actions of 327 judges.<\/p>\n \u201cComplaints about harassment, bullying and overbearing conduct continue,\u201d Ritchie wrote, adding that most \u201carise in the course of highly stressful proceedings\u201d.<\/p>\n Of the complaints, seven were deemed worthy of being referred to their respective courts\u2019 Head of Bench; six to the Chief District Court Judge and one to the Chief Judge of the M\u0101ori Land Court.<\/p>\n One followed a District Court judge talking to a complainant in an \u201cinappropriate way, for which an unreserved apology was offered\u201d.<\/p>\n Another complaint alleged \u201cjudicial bullying\u201d by a District Court judge.<\/p>\n Ritchie wrote in the annual report that while an audio recording \u201cwas thought not to fit [the] complainant\u2019s description of an \u2018aggressive, angry, demeaning and bullying outburst\u2019\u201d he made the referral on the possibility the Head of Bench might have a differing view, \u201cin which case guidance could be offered to the judge or judges generally on dealing with such situations\u201d.<\/p>\n An investigation into a complaint of alleged \u201cbullying\u201d by another District Court judge concluded the \u201cexchanges between the judge and the complainant (a lawyer) may not have met the standards expected by the Guidelines for Judicial Conduct<\/a>\u201d.<\/p>\n Another District Court judge was alleged to have shown \u201cincompetence\u201d. Most aspects of the complaint were dismissed but \u201ccertain elements relating to basic care on the judge\u2019s part\u201d were referred to the Chief District Court Judge.<\/p>\n That included the potential to offer the judge \u201csome guidance\u201d and consideration in terms of the overall training of judges.<\/p>\n 2023-24: Language and facial expressions of judges probed<\/p>\n Sixteen referrals were made to heads of respective courts, including 14 to the Chief District Court judge in the 2023-24 financial year.<\/p>\n Three related to behaviour of a judge \u201cdescribed by a High Court Judge on appeal as rendering a hearing unfair\u201d.<\/p>\n Others included the \u201cnature and tenor\u201d of comments made to a lawyer, the use of coarse language and \u201cconcern\u201d over a direction that children were not to be brought into the courtroom.<\/p>\n It was not just the choice of words used by judges that contributed to complaints during 2023-24.<\/p>\n Several complaints also expressed concern about facial expressions during hearings.<\/p>\n Ritchie wrote: \u201cNo video recordings are available so there is obvious difficulty in assessing that aspect of a complaint although, on occasions, an audio recording does indicate agitation by a judge\u201d.<\/p>\n 2022-23: Family Court complaints soar<\/p>\n Complaints around the alleged actions of Family Court judges more than doubled from 35 to 74 during this 12-month period.<\/p>\n But none were referred to the Principal Family Court Judge for further action.<\/p>\n Of the 332 complaints lodged, 15 were referred to the respective Heads of Bench, including 11 to the Chief District Court Judge.<\/p>\n That included the use of judicial email for private communication.<\/p>\n 2021-22: Judge \u2018clearly troubled by alcohol use\u2019<\/p>\n While claims of \u201cbullying\u201d dropped in this time period, Ritchie said \u201callegations of substance abuse\u201d<\/a> were among the 323 complaints.<\/p>\n The nature of one complaint was that a judge \u201ccould not have got matters so badly wrong without being affected by alcohol or drugs\u201d.<\/p>\n Ritchie wrote that was an easy allegation to make, but one in which \u2013 in all but one case \u2013 no evidence was found.<\/p>\n \u201cA recommendation would almost certainly have been made in the case of a judge clearly troubled by alcohol use,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n However, the judge resigned from office during the preliminary examination \u201cand my jurisdiction ended\u201d.<\/p>\n The 34 referrals made to heads of respective courts by the JCC during the 2021-22 financial year was the largest annual number made in the 10-year period reviewed by the Herald.<\/p>\n They included the handling of cases involving offences against women and inappropriate disclosure of details likely to lead to the identification of the whereabouts of a victim.<\/p>\n Christchurch District Court Judge David Ruth<\/a> received complaints for telling an anti-vax drink-driver that his \u201cnutcase views\u201d would get no sympathy in his court because the man was a danger to the community and should be ashamed of himself.<\/p>\n Judge Ruth responded to the criticism: \u201cI can accept that the words directed at this defendant in my courtroom may be seen as overly robust.\u201d<\/p>\n 2020-21: Good news for judges amid \u2018rare\u2019 complaints of \u2018overbearing and bullying behaviour\u2019<\/p>\n In the 12 months recorded, the JCC received 214 complaints relating to 363 judges.<\/p>\n Ritchie wrote that issues previously flagged for concern had reduced.<\/p>\n \u201cSome two years ago, there was a growing focus on behaviour thought to be overbearing, harassing, bullying or inconsistent with the Guidelines for Judicial Conduct,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n While complaints of that sort continued to be received, he noted \u201cthe overall impression is that overbearing and bullying behaviour by judges is relatively rare\u201d.<\/p>\n 2019-20: Questions over training of judges<\/p>\n Ritchie\u2019s annual report highlighted how many complaints about alleged behaviour deviated from what had actually occurred.<\/p>\n That year, there were 162 complaints about individual judges from 136 complainants.<\/p>\n \u201cOn occasions, it has been notable just how far an allegation departs from the reality, even allowing for the tension and anxiety people justifiably feel when appearing in court.\u201d<\/p>\n Eight referrals were made, two to the Chief District Court Judge relating to \u201cborderline cases of behaviour inconsistent with expected standards of courtesy, patience and tolerance\u201d.<\/p>\n A trio of referrals were also made to the Chief Coroner around the handling of two separate coronial inquiries.<\/p>\n Ritchie also wrote that three \u201cinformal referrals\u201d had been made regarding procedural issues, saying they could highlight any changes needed on training offered to judges.<\/p>\n 2018-19: Te reo M\u0101ori use fallout, judges called out for \u2018overbearing, harassing, bullying\u2019 behaviour<\/p>\n High Court Justice Timothy Brewer\u2019s querying whether a lawyer<\/a> who introduced herself to court in te reo M\u0101ori needed an interpreter, and whether she was using the language to make \u201ca political point\u201d, led to a complaint to the JCC.<\/p>\n While the JCC\u2019s 2018-19 annual report did not specifically name Brewer, it revealed among the nine referrals made was one to the Chief High Court Judge \u201crelated to an insensitive and overbearing reaction to [a] counsel introducing herself in an appropriate way in te reo M\u0101ori\u201d.<\/p>\n Nine referrals were made, including a trio relating to behaviour that appeared to be \u201coverbearing, harassing, bullying or otherwise inconsistent with the Guidelines for Judicial Conduct\u201d.<\/p>\n 2017-18: Judges reminded of \u2018obligation to treat lawyers with respect and courtesy\u2019<\/p>\n Judges were firmly reminded of how they should interact with lawyers in Ritchie\u2019s annual report.<\/p>\n \u201cThe commissioner has been aware of a spotlight on what is described as bullying behaviour by judges towards lawyers,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n \u201cComplaints of this nature received by the commissioner are few and far between but by no means unheard of.\u201d<\/p>\n Of eight referrals made in 2017-18, three related to one District Court judge who had \u201caccepted was an error of judgment in not articulating sufficiently the views he would usually express concerning violence of any sort, particularly domestic violence\u201d.<\/p>\n 2016-17: Family Court judge apologises for causing \u2018unintended distress\u2019<\/p>\n This time period produced just two referrals; the lowest number made by the JCC in the 10-year period reviewed by the Herald.<\/p>\n One of the referrals related to behaviour outside the courtroom which \u201cmay have diminished public confidence in the judge\u2019s suitability for office\u201d.<\/p>\n While not a formal referral, the JDC also told the Head of the Family Court Bench about comments made by a judge which \u201ccaused unintended distress to the complainant\u201d.<\/p>\n The judge \u201cunreservedly apologised\u201d for the comments.<\/p>\n 2015-16: \u2018Unfairness\u2019 and \u2018overbearing and intimidating conduct\u2019 called out<\/p>\n The JCC received 355 complaints in this time period, with Ritchie noting it was a 14% increase on the previous 12 months.<\/p>\n Complaints related to Supreme Court matters topped the list at 221, but the JCC said they came from only 13 individuals, \u201cof whom some have been declared vexatious litigants\u201d.<\/p>\n The commissioner made six referrals, including for \u201cunfairness in comments to a jury in a District Court trial\u201d and \u201capparent overbearing and intimidating conduct toward a litigant\u201d.<\/p>\nComments a Christchurch judge made to an anti-vax drink-driver over their “nutcase views” attracted several complaints and he conceded his words could have been seen as “overly robust”. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
Judge Ema Aitken, pictured with her partner Dr David Galler, kept her job as a District Court judge after an investigation by the Judicial Conduct Panel.<\/p>\n
In the 2024-25 financial year, 253 complaints were made relating to the alleged actions of 327 judges. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
One complaint against a judge was about the use of coarse language. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
Complaints about the alleged conduct of judges in the Family Court rose sharply in 2022-23 but none were referred for further action. Photo \/ Olga Yastremska, Africa Images<\/p>\n
A judge “clearly troubled by alcohol use” escaped censure after resigning from office while New Zealand’s magistrate watchdog carried out a preliminary examination into their conduct. Photo \/ 123rf<\/p>\n
The annual report from 2019-20 asked questions about training provided to some judges. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
Justice Timothy Brewer’s response to a lawyer who introduced herself in te reo was the source of a referral. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
Judges were firmly reminded of how they should interact with lawyers in Alan Ritchie’s annual report. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
A Family Court judge offered an apology after their conduct. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n