Updated AIJA Criteria for Judicial Appointment

In January 2024, the Australian Institute of Judicial Administration released its updated handbook concerning the attributes of lawyers apropos of judicial appointment. The apparent intention of the document is to inform appointment by government, but no doubt with other attributes to be brought to book in such process.

The updated handbook may be found on this link.

Writing concerning such attributes in The Australian on 13 February 2024, Ellie Dudley, Legal Affairs Correspondent, wrote:

The handbook puts a new ­emphasis on the “interpersonal abilities” of potential judges, and states an appointee’s ability to manage their demeanour are also important to consider.

A candidate should “be aware of and thoughtfully manage their own emotion and the feelings of others, consistent with the judicial role; balance confidence and ­humility; be willing to seek assistance and support when experiencing difficulties, especially with stress or trauma”.

Successful judicial appointees will also “speak calmly, courteously, and patiently, even when necessary to be forceful”. They will “listen ­attentively, ask clear, concise, relevant and understandable questions … (and) understand social media and use it appropriately”.

“Judicial communication skills, including listening, are identified as part of a wide range of interactive and interpersonal abilities. These qualities are critical to effective court management and central to court users’ perceptions of legitimacy of judicial authority,” the handbook says.

“Such abilities and conduct are also important for judicial officers as part of a respectful well-functioning workplace.”

The changes to judicial appointments come amid a nationwide push to modernise the judicial system, including an Australian Law Reform Commission review into the handling of sexual assault cases, which will investigate frameworks about evidence, court processes and jury directions, and laws about consent.

…

Diversity is now included as a cornerstone of the appointments handbook, researched by Flinders University emeritus professor Kathy Mack, stating that a diverse judiciary “promotes public confidence in, and supports the legitimacy of, the courts and their decisions”.

“A diverse judiciary will have broader perspectives available to decision-makers, potentially reducing the risk of biased or ill-­informed judgments,” the guidelines read.