Separation of Powers

The corruption issue arises here where the politicisation by ‘fear & favour’ is extended so as to bridge the separation between the executive of government and the judiciary.

These two arms of government, under the Westminster system to which all parties claim to pay respect, are required to act so as to preserve and promote the independence of the judiciary.

Judicial independence can be perceived to be under attack through a number of mechanisms, including:

• the behaviour of appointees in those few, key government positions where responsibilities are held jointly by the same appointment within both of these spheres of government;
• the appointment of persons to the judiciary because of their alignment with the political party in government more than on the merit of the candidate’s skills and experience in the law;
• actions taken by the Executive arm of government with respect to the activities and decisions taken by lawyers and/or members of the judiciary as a part of judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings;
• use of the prosecution and judicial system to imprison political opponents; and
• use of executive powers in ways adverse to lawyers and or members of the judiciary where the law requires that judicial or parliamentary powers and procedures are required to adversely affect lawyers and the judiciary.

The Courier Mail advocated the establishment of a Royal Commission into the conduct of the judiciary in Queensland, following the alleged behaviour of judges towards, and the removal from office of, a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The separation of powers was a primary issue used to support this call. The appointment processes used to select members of the judiciary by both political parties were also featured in the media’s concerns.

Such a Royal Commission or other suitable inquiry would allow any allegations of ‘fear & favour’ within the judiciary, or towards members of the judiciary, to be aired in public under privilege. The alleged operations of the Legal Services Commission (LSC) in Queensland, an entity which falls under the arm of the Executive, with respect to alleged disclosures about the misbehaviour of lawyers and members of the judiciary, may be another area where a concern for maintaining the separation of the powers of the judiciary from the ‘fear and favour’ of the executive may draw submissions to an appropriate inquiry.

QWAG is concerned as to whether or not actions taken by the Office of the LSC may or may not be influencing, directly or indirectly, the matters brought before or not brought before, and / or the matters pursued by or not pursued by, Royal Commissions in general. QWAG has addressed its concerns in this regard by written submission to the Royal Commission currently underway, namely, the Royal Commission into the Institutional Response to allegations of paedophilia and child abuse.

In the wake of these concerns, QWAG maintains its call for a Royal Commission into Queensland’s judiciary.