Client Services in Local Courts Principles, Standards and Benchmarks

Access to Justice
Expedition and Timeliness
Equality, Fairness and Integrity
Independence and Accountability
Public Trust and Confidence
Home

 

 


Central Review

This central review considers issues for which the Chief Magistrate or other central agencies are responsible, and is carried out centrally. It is carried out occasionally, when policy is implemented and reviewed, in order to ensure current awareness of central policy and statewide consistency in the application of policy and law. It is not carried out in conjunction with Local Court reviews.

The issues involved require formulation of policy by the Chief Magistrate and the Attorney General and his or her Department, as well as the Judicial Commission. For the review to be successfully carried out and acted upon the support of the Chief Magistrate and the Department are necessary.

This checklist may be printed out and used as a guide to each review. However it should always be read, and the results interpreted, in the context of the principles, standards and benchmarks (which appear at the left of this page).

For the greater benefit in using this review, read it in conjunction with the principles it monitors:

1: Access to Justice
3: Equality, Fairness and Integrity
4: Independence and Accountability
5: Public Trust and Confidence
The Central Review does not monitor Principle 2 (Expedition and Timeliness.)

 


1 Access to Justice

 

1.5.1

Ask the Chief Magistrate, the Judicial Commission and Central Administration of Local Courts:

  • What courses are available for magistrates and staff in multicultural issues, including the use of interpreters?
  • When was such a course last run?
  • Have all Magistrates done this training?
1.5.2

Ask the Chief Magistrate, the Judicial Commission and Central Administration of Local Courts:

  • What training is available for magistrates and staff in indigenous issues?
    (including: Aboriginal society and the history of and origins of social disadvantage among Aboriginal communities.)
  • Were Aboriginal organisations involved in this training?
  • When was such a course last run?
  • Have all Magistrates done this training?
1.6.1

Ask Central Administration of Local Courts:

  • How many Aboriginal staff are employed in local courts?
  • How does the administration ensure Aboriginal staff are available in courts with an Aboriginal clientele?
  • What policies and practices exist to recruit and train Aboriginal staff?
1.7.2

Ask the Chief Magistrate:

  • Have guidelines for the assessment of parties' and witnesses' ability to speak and understand English been published and disseminated?
1.8.1

Ask responsible officer/s of the Attorney General's Department:

  • How are local area needs for services measured and tested against State wide standards and use of existing resources?
  • Do these measures take account of those factors listed at benchmark 1.8.1?


The Central Review does not monitor Principle 2: Expedition and Timeliness.

 


3 Equality, Fairness and Integrity

 

3.1.1

Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Judicial Commission:

  • Are transcripts made available to Magistrates of cases in which Magistrates' errors are corrected, or which are relevant to their decision?

3.1.2

Ask the Chief Magistrate:

  • Is there a policy on granting adjournments? How is it made known to Magistrates?
3.3.1

Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Judicial Commission:

  • Do you receive data from BOCSAR or any other source which you pass on to Magistrates to show how their own sentencing practices compare to the overall patterns of Magistrates?

3.3.4

 

Compare statewide data from the Bureau of Crime Statistics & Research to discover whether there is undue disparity in the rate at which Aboriginal people are granted bail compared with the rate at which non-Aboriginal people are granted bail.
Ask the Judicial Commission:

  • Is there undue disparity in the rate at which Aboriginal people are granted bail compared with the rate at which non-Aboriginal people are granted bail?
3.3.5

Compare statewide Local Courts Statistics Unit data to discover whether there is undue disparity among Magistrates in the outcomes of AVO applications.
Ask the Judicial Commission:

  • Is there undue disparity among Magistrates in the outcomes of AVO applications?
3.3.6

Compare statewide Local Courts Statistics Unit data to discover whether there is undue disparity in the proportion of interviews with Chamber Magistrates leading to AVO applications.


4 Independence and Accountability

 

4.1.1

Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Attorney General's Department how vacancies, selection procedures, selection committee membership and selection criteria for the appointment of magistrates are made public.

Consider examples of advertisements for the appointment of Magistrates, and note where these appeared.

4.1.2

From the Chief Magistrate and the Attorney General's Department obtain copies of all public statements on the necessary attributes of Magistrates and policy on professional and other qualifications.

Note where these appear publicly.

4.1.3

From the Chief Magistrate and the Attorney General's Department obtain copies of public statements on terms and conditions of appointment of Magistrates.

Note where these appear publicly.

4.2.1

From the Chief Magistrate or the Judicial Commission obtain copies of any public code of conduct for Magistrates.
Check whether it covers:

  • financial affairs, with provision for declarations of interest;
  • conduct in court;
  • relations with the legal profession, other users of the court and with the wider community;
  • relations with court staff and the Attorney General's Department.

Note where this code of conduct appears publicly.

4.2.2

Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Judicial Commission when the code of conduct for Magistrates was last updated, and on whose advice.

Was this update made available to all Magistrates?

4.2.3 Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Judicial Commission what procedures there are for introducing the code of conduct to Magistrates, at induction or through regular workshops.
4.3.1

From the Chief Magistrate or the Judicial Commission obtain copies of grounds for proof of breach of the code of conduct.

Note where these appear publicly.

4.3.2

From the Chief Magistrate or the Judicial Commission obtain copies of procedures for reporting alleged misconduct and/or breach of the code of conduct.

Note where these appear publicly.

4.3.3

Ask the Chief Magistrate and the Judicial Commission when the procedures for reporting misconduct were last reviewed.

Was this within the previous 12 months?

4.4.3

Ask the Chief Magistrate whether s/he receives regular reports from courts on their relations with government and other external agencies.

Are reports of these reviews made public annually in the Chief Magistrate's Review of the court, covering the following areas?

  • issues of law reform;
  • any aspects of Local court practice which have been the subject of government action or debate;
  • aspects of practice which have been the subject of public debate or media comment.


5 Public Trust and Confidence

 

5.1.2 Ask the Chief Magistrate whether guidelines for the operation of court users' forums are up to date and made available to the courts.
5.5.1

Is measured by an opinion poll commissioned centrally. Data can be interpreted as indicating trends over time, for rural and urban areas statewide. Increasing proportions of people answering 'yes' to (b) would indicate improving public trust and confidence in the courts' accessibility.

It is unlikely that this method would gain meaningful data on a small area, or local court basis.

A question such as the following should be developed centrally, piloted and then administered in a range of urban and rural areas at regular (eg annual) intervals:

Eg. 'Who do you think can make use of the courts:

a) the rich
b) people like me
c) criminals.'

(answer yes or no to each)

5.8.1

Ask properties staff of the Attorney General's Department responsible for briefing architects whether they have guidelines or a standard brief for court house design requiring courts to be distinct from the police station, having:

  • a separate entrance from the police station;
  • preferably well removed from the police station;
  • with signs clearly distinguishing it from the police station.

 

| Back to Top |
| Access to Justice | Expedition & Timeliness | Equality, Fairness & Integrity | Independence & Accountability |
| Public Trust & Confidence |
Welcome | The Project | Home |

Last Updated 10/02/01
Designed by: We can design a professional web site for you too!
Email: rmohr@uow.edu.au