1
P R E L I M Judicial Commission of NSW I N A R I E S
Annual Report 2011–12 Judicial Commission of NSW
PRELIMINARIES i 1 . PRELIMINARIES
Our focus for 2011–12 1.2 Welcome to the annual report Contents Examining complaints Our annual report informs those we serve and our partners 1 Preliminaries ...... inside front cover was on educational • met our target to examine all complaints within about our yearly performance and programs. Highlights ...... inside front cover 12 months: see p 25 Welcome to the annual report ...... 1 This annual report reviews our output and activities during the innovation and using • examined 90 complaints: see p 26 2011–12 financial year. Our legislative charter is the Judicial How to read this annual report ...... 1 • responded to 426 requests for advice and information Officers Act 1986. This Act specifies three functions which are Reporting framework ...... 1 new technology to about the complaints process: see p 26 the key operational activities in our Strategic Plan and Results Our profile ...... 2 and Services Plan. These functions are to: Who we are ...... 2 1. provide a continuing education and training program for Strategic focus ...... 2 benefit the judiciary. Partners about 330 judicial officers in NSW (see pp 30–35 ) Our vision ...... 2 • provided advice and research assistance to Legal Aid 2. assist the courts to achieve consistency in imposing Our mission ...... 2 NSW: see p 54 sentences by monitoring sentences and publishing Our values ...... 2 information and reports on sentencing (see pp 36–41) 1.1 Highlights • presented at the World Bank-sponsored International Our partners ...... 2 Symposium on Judicial Reform in Ankara, Turkey: 3. examine complaints made about a judicial officer’s ability Our people ...... 2 or behaviour (see pp 42–47). Continuing judicial education program see p 55 Our structure ...... 2 • assisted Indonesian Supreme Court and Indonesian This is our 25th annual report. Last year’s annual report gained a Our governance ...... 2 • judicial satisfaction with the education program at a Judicial Commission through the Australia Indonesia Gold Award in the 2012 Australasian Reporting Awards. Letter to Attorney General ...... 2 Partnership for Justice Program: see p 55 10-year high, increasing from 93% to 95%: see p 14 Our history ...... 3 • participated in the Fifth International Conference on To reduce the environmental impact, this report and other Judicial • produced 21 publications: see p 17 Performance results for 2011–12 ...... 4 Training of the Judiciary organised by the International Commission publications can be downloaded from our website at • provided 34 education sessions: see p 17 Organisation for Judicial Training in Bordeaux, France: www.judcom.nsw.gov.au. They are also available on request. Year at a glance ...... 6 • provided iPad training and support for magistrates: see p 57 President’s foreword ...... 8 see p 18 Chief Executive’s message ...... 9 • added a Ngara Yura section to our website: see p 34 How to read this annual report 2 Performance ...... 10 People This report is divided into sections: an overview of the Providing continuing judicial education Commission and our performance for the year, including and training ...... 12 Research and sentencing program • staff satisfaction at an all-time high of 96%: see p 66 information about measured outcomes, targets, challenges and Assisting the courts to achieve • retained low employee turnover rate of 3%: see p 66 statistics (pp 2–27); our three key programs — continuing judicial consistency in sentencing ...... 19 • use of criminal law information on our website at an • increased our training and professional development education and training; research and sentencing; and examining Examining complaints ...... 24 all-time high, growing by 51%: see p 20 complaints (pp 28–47); engagement with our partners hours: see p 67 3 Programs ...... 28 • use of the online Judicial Information Research System (pp 48–69); information about our people (pp 58–69) our • exceeded NSW Government equal employment Continuing judicial education (JIRS) at an all-time high, averaging 99,172 hits each practices, principles and processes (pp 70–81); and a detailed opportunity and culturally and linguistically diverse and training ...... 30 month: see p 22 financial report (pp 82–107). benchmarking targets in staff profile: see pp 68–69 Research and sentencing ...... 36 • met our target to publish two major research studies: Examining complaints ...... 42 see p 39 Reporting framework 4 Partners ...... 48 • reviewed and republished over 40 suggested jury Practices, policies and processes directions: see p 39 We have adopted elements of the Global Reporting Initiative 5 People ...... 58 6 Practices, policies and processes . . . . . 70 • developed an application and voice recognition function • 11 Commission meetings held: see p 73 (GRI) in this report, identified in the GRI’s Sustainability for quick access on iPads to the Judicial Information • 4 Audit and Risk Management Committee meetings Reporting Guidelines (Version 3). 7 Finance ...... 82 Research System: see p 40 held: see p 74 Appendices ...... 108 The specially designed logo above, is used to show where we • updated and settled internal audit plan: see p 74 report in relation to the GRI indicators. The logo symbolises Glossary ...... 127 • ensured a safe working environment: see p 78 that the Judicial Commission is committed to thinking Index ...... 128 Cover photo: iPads were issued to Local Court magistrates this • 5% reduction in office energy use: see p 80 progressively about sustainability. GRI Index ...... 130 year and we provided training in how to use them and developed Five years at a glance . . . . inside back cover an app and voice recognition function. Pictured are our computer Page 130 provides the GRI index of standard disclosures and training officer Joy Blunt (standing) with the Deputy Chief where these are located in this annual report. Magistrate of the Local Court, Jane Mottley.
1 1
Our values P Connecting R We value our partners and work cooperatively with them. E Our mission is to L Professionalism I We are recognised for our integrity, our independence, and M foster public the high quality services we deliver. I Enhancement N confidence in the We continually improve the way we do business. A R Sustainability I We will consider the way our operations, products and judicial system of E services impact on people, the environment and the S NSW . economy. Our partners We provide services to the judicial officers and people of NSW, the courts, the legal profession, other justice sector agencies, law libraries and law students. We share our experience with other Australian and overseas judicial 1.4 Our history For 25 years, the
1.3 Our profile education providers. 1985 Who we are Controversies involving judicial officers in Australia are Judicial Commission reported in the media. The Judicial Commission of New South Wales is an Our people independent statutory corporation established under the We employed the equivalent of 34 full-time staff in 2011–12. 1986 of NSW has promoted Judicial Officers Act 1986. We report to the Parliament of NSW Government announces the establishment of the New South Wales. Judicial Commission in response to a perceived crisis in Our structure public confidence in the judiciary. Judicial Officers Act excellence in judicial Strategic focus The Commission has three divisions — education, research 1986 commences in December 1986. The Commission and sentencing, and complaints. See our organisation combines a complaints function with educational and performance. As the first organisation of its kind in Australia, we have chart on p 72. sentencing research roles. developed a high level of expertise in judicial education, sentencing research, judicial support and case management 1987 systems. We provide continuing judicial education, conduct Our governance Judicial Officers Act amended to establish the 2006 an extensive research program into sentencing law and An independent Commission of 10 members guides Commission as an independent statutory authority. Equality Before the Law Bench Book launched in June and practice, and provide sentencing information to the courts our strategic direction and examines all complaints. The Operations commence in October. Sentencing Bench Book in September. and government agencies. We also examine complaints Chief Executive, supported by three directors, manages 1988 made about a judicial officer’s ability or behaviour. our daily operations. See pp 60–63 for their profiles and Education program commenced. First annual court 2007 achievements. An important part of our work is to share our accumulated conference held in June. Local Court Bench Book and Judicial Officers Act amended to provide for lay knowledge and experience with the national and global Judicial Officers’ Bulletin launched. representation on a Conduct Division. network of judiciaries and other judicial education Civil Trials Bench Book launched in June. Commission providers. This aspect of our social performance and its 1990 Letter to Attorney General celebrates 20 years of successful operations in October. impact is reported in the Partners section at p 48. Chief Justice Gleeson AC launches the Sentencing Information System (SIS) to help judicial officers improve 2010 The Honourable Gregory Smith SC MP consistency in approach to sentencing. Criminal Trial Local Court Bench Book published on the Commission’s Our vision Attorney General and Minister for Justice Courts Bench Book launched. Governor Macquarie Tower, Sydney NSW 2000 website. All Commission bench books are now publicly The people of NSW will have confidence in the exceptional 1996 accessible. ability and performance of judges and magistrates. Dear Attorney SIS becomes part of the Judicial Information Research 2011 System (JIRS). The Judicial Commission of NSW has pleasure in Two magistrates separately address Parliament after Our mission presenting to you the report of its activities for the year 1998 Conduct Division reports are made to the Governor. ended 30 June 2012. • To foster public confidence in the judicial system by A judge addresses Parliament after a Conduct Division Parliament votes not to remove the magistrates from providing continuing education for judicial officers, judicial office. This report is submitted in accordance with section 49 reports to the Governor. Parliament votes not to remove promoting consistency in sentencing and equality the judge. before the law, examining complaints about judicial of the Judicial Officers Act 1986 and section 12 of the 2012 Annual Reports (Departments) Act 1985. It is required to officers, and educating the public about what judicial Judicial Officers Act amended to increase lay membership Judicial Officers Act amended to require the Commission be laid before both Houses of Parliament. officers do. of Commission from two to four. to provide information, if requested, about a complaint to the Attorney General unless it is not in the public interest • To promote the highest standards of judicial behaviour Yours sincerely and to foster judicial capacity and high quality decision 2001 to do so. Commission must also now notify the Attorney making. JIRS is described as a “world leader in this field” by Lord General when a complaint has been referred to a Conduct • To share our knowledge and experience with the global Justice Robin Auld, senior presiding judge for England Division. network of judiciaries and judicial education providers. The Honourable T Bathurst E J Schmatt PSM and Wales. Chief Justice of NSW Chief Executive • To remain committed to environmental sustainability. President 2004 “Recent law” component of JIRS launched.
2 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRELIMINARIES 3 1
P R E L Performance results for 2011–12 I M I N A 1.5 Performance for the year R The statutory functions contained in the Judicial Officers Act 1986, our Business Improvement Plan, Strategic Plan I and Results and Services Plan direct our operations. The following tables detail our yearly organisational performance E in our three key programs. S
Key results Key services An overview of performance targets and results relating to the Commission’s core responsibilities An overview of performance targets and results relating to the Commission’s delivery of services
Strategies Measures 2010 –11 2011 –12 2011 –12 2012 –13 Program area Service measures 2010 –11 2011 –12 2011– 12 2012 –13 result target result target result target result target Key result area: Judicial education Key result area: Judicial education
Desired result: A better informed and professional judiciary Conference and seminar Number of judicial education days per year 1,389 1,400 870* 1,400 program for judicial Average number of training days undertaken 4.7 5 3* 5 • Develop appropriate % of voluntary attendance at annual 93% 90% 77%* 90% officers: see pp 12–17 judicial skills and conferences per judicial officer (national standard is 5 days) values % of voluntary attendance at magistrates’ 100% 100% 100% 100% Publications: see p 16 Number of bench book updates, bulletins, 23 21** 21** 21** • Promote high induction/orientation programs journals, education monographs, and standards of judicial training DVDs performance Overall satisfaction rating with judicial 93% 85% 95% 85% education Computer support: Number of computer training sessions 26 n/a*** 18 n/a*** • See pp 30–35 see p 18 % of judicial officers who attended at least 93% 90% 82%* 90% Number of computer training hours 44 n/a*** 109 n/a*** 2 days of judicial training Key result area: Research and sentencing Average number of training days offered per 5.3 5 4* 5 judicial officer per court (excluding orientation Judicial Information Research % of JIRS availability 99% 98% 99% 98% System (JIRS): see pp 21–22 programs) Number of enhancements to JIRS 10 6 11 6 Number of timely updates to the Civil Trials 7** 7** 7** 6** Timeliness of sentencing material on JIRS Bench Book and Local Court Bench Book – Recent Law items posted on JIRS (within 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks Key result area: Research and sentencing number of weeks of receipt)
Desired result: Improved consistency in sentencing and reduced errors – Judgments (within number of days of 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day receipt) • Improve sentencing Number of timely updates to the Sentencing 7 6 6 6 – Summaries of judgments (within number 6 weeks 5 weeks 6 weeks 5 weeks consistency Bench Book and Criminal Trial Courts Bench of weeks of receipt) • Provide timely and Book – Sentencing statistics loaded on JIRS 1–4† 1–4† 1–4† 1–4† relevant information JIRS usage (average page hits per month) 88,704 80,000 99.172 90,000 about sentencing (within number of months of receipt) months months months months patterns Original research and Number of sentencing trends papers, 9 8* 8 8 • See pp 36–41 analysis: monographs, Sentencing Bench Book and see pp 20–21, 39 Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book updates Key result area: Examining complaints Research assistance to % of requests resolved within 2 days 90% 90% 90% 90% Desired result: Judicial accountability through effective examination of complaints against judicial officers judicial officers: see p 21 • Provide complainants Number of informal enquiries attended to from 450 n/a*** 426 n/a*** Lawcodes database: Code and distribute new and amended 100% 100% 100% 100% with accurate and potential complainants see p 52 offences within 4 days of commencement helpful information and advice % of user enquiries resolved within 24 hours 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of complaints examined in reporting 56 n/a*** 90 n/a*** • Investigate complaints period Key result area: Examining complaints in an effective manner • See pp 42–47 Timely and efficient % of complaints acknowledged within 98% 100% 100% 100% examination of complaints: 1 week of receipt see p 24–26 * The Local Court Annual Conference was not held this financial year: see p 13 . % of complaints examined within 95% 90% 68% 90% ** We changed our measure to include Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book updates in Research and Sentencing . 6 months of receipt *** We do not set quantitative targets as we examine each complaint made to the Commission . % of complaints examined within 100% 100% 100% 100% 12 months of receipt
* The Local Court Annual Conference was not held this financial year: see p 13 . ** We changed our measure to include Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book updates in Research and Sentencing . *** We do not set quantitative targets . † See discussion about the difficulties with timeliness of sentencing data on p 21 .
4 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRELIMINARIES 5 1
P R E We responded The total Government contribution of $5.215 million L Research and sentencing program Finance covered 89% of our total expenses. The Commission relied I on its own revenue of $554,000 from sales of services, M quickly to support Overall use of our online sentencing and criminal law Our financial result this year was a surplus of $18,000. investment revenue from interest on funds of $66,000 and resources is at an all-time high. Use of the online Judicial The budget was for a surplus of $41,000. The $23,000 other self-generated revenue of $53,000. The total of own I Information Research System (JIRS) has experienced under budget performance was mainly due to the need to generated income was $673,000. N magistrates using growth of 12% and website use of resources has make higher provision for employees’ long service leave A experienced significant growth of 51%. entitlements. The recurrent funding from 2012–13 through to 2015–16 R is being reduced by labour expense cap reductions, I A key focus this year has been to rewrite more than 40 Income was $5.888 million (last year: $6.076 million program savings through reduction in scope, and iPads. jury directions in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book income) comprising $5.215 million in Government E procurement savings. This means that significant S to aid juror comprehension in criminal trials: see p 39. A contributions and $673,000 from other revenue. We spent efficiency savings and increased own generated income major effort has been to disseminate information about a a total of $5.870 million (last year: $6.094 million spent). need to occur in order to maintain service levels. The significant High Court decision that has affected the way Revenue and expenditure decreased by 3.1% and 3.7% reduction in funding from 2012–13 through to 2015–16 that judges sentence offenders in NSW. The impact of this respectively. 1.6 Year at a glance is $942,000 less escalation adjustments allowed of decision is discussed on pp 41 and 54. $490,000. The result is an overall decrease in funding of Sales of our software development services at $554,000 $452,000 over the next four financial years. Focus for the year were higher (last year: $517,000). The Commission is well-placed to deliver our education and Investment income has reduced due to interest rate research resources to iPads and other tablet devices as Complaints Investment and other revenue totalling $119,000 were cuts in line with the Reserve Bank official interest rate these platforms begin to supersede print publications. higher than the budget of $108,000 and were below last reductions. Interest rates received in July 2011 of 4.65% The number of complaints lodged with the Commission is year’s $164,000. The Local Court of NSW issued an iPad to each at a five-year high, with a 54% increase this financial year. have progressively been cut to 3.4% as of July 2012. This magistrate in May and June 2012. We provided training This is because two related complainants made 34 similar is effectively a 27% reduction in investment income. and help-desk support in this new technology. We also complaints. A higher number of complaints than usual developed an application and voice recognition function (12%) were referred for further action and four complaints Figure 1 Financial summary for 2011–12 so that magistrates can quickly access the online Judicial have been referred to a Conduct Division: see p 26. The Information Research System (JIRS). These will be available formation of a Conduct Division will have a significant Revenue 2010–11 2011–12 Change Budget 2011–12 next financial year. Magistrates’ feedback is that the impact on our resources next financial year. $’000 $’000 % $’000 Commission has responded quickly and has allowed them Government contributions 5,395 5,215 -3.3% 5,227 to use the new technology effectively. Revenue from other sources 681 673 -1.2% 508 Our partners Total revenue 6,076 5,888 -3.1% 5,735 Continuing judicial education program We have continued to promote community awareness Expenditure throughout the year. An important focus has been on Employee-related expenses 4,022 4,334 7.8% 4,062 Satisfaction with our judicial education program is at a informing the legal profession about our research and Other operating expenses 1,350 1,413 4.7% 1,402 10-year high, with participants recording a 95% satisfaction sentencing work. We have conducted information sessions rate. Attendance at our various education events did not at Legal Aid NSW, the Aboriginal Legal Service and the Depreciation and amortisation 80 90 12.5% 90 meet target this year, falling by 37%. The main reason for Public Defenders’ Chambers, all of which were well Conduct Division 642 33 -94.9% 140 this abnormal result is because the Local Court annual attended by the profession. Total 6,094 5,870 -3.7% 5,694 conference was not held this financial year but will be held in August 2012. This conference usually accounts for the The Commission continued to have a strong focus on Net result –18 +18 200.0% +41 equivalent of 400 judicial education days. We anticipate that capacity building in the Asia Pacific Region and globally. we will meet our attendance targets next year. We participated in high level judicial reform forums in France, Turkey and Indonesia and hosted international A key event on the judicial education calendar was the visitors and delegations at our Sydney office. “Exchanging Ideas II” conference held in September Our outlook the courts provide to us. This has affected our 2011. The conference was part of our Aboriginal cultural As part of our mission to promote community awareness, targets to load statistical information onto the awareness program for judicial officers and brought we made PDF versions of our bench books available for Our strategic focus for 2012–13 will be on Judicial Information Research System (JIRS). We free download from our website at the beginning of 2012. together more than 70 Aboriginal community leaders, fostering community understanding of judicial have worked with the Department of Attorney The website use of the bench books has consequently Elders, judicial officers, academics, government officers officers’ role and work. We will deliver a General and Justice and the Bureau of Crime experienced an unprecedented 51% growth. and professionals in health care, legal service delivery “community awareness of the judiciary” Statistics and Research to provide training and social sciences. Delegates exchanged ideas and program in late 2012. Our continuing focus and feedback to court staff to address these information about the legacy of the Royal Commission will be on promoting high standards of judicial problems, allocated more of our research staff into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (finalised in 1991), the performance and a consistent approach to to audit the raw data, and generated regular underlying social and psychological causes of offending, sentencing, and ensuring that we handle error reports for our Audit and Risk Management factors that contribute to reoffending, and strategies to reduce the impact of imprisonment. The weekend complaints efficiently and effectively. Committee: see p 21. conference was a positive contribution to the ongoing Government funding reduction and lower interest dialogue about the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people rates present a challenging financial environment. in the criminal justice system. Our challenges and how we However, we are committed to maintaining our responded to them high quality programs and the range of service A continuing challenge has been the ongoing delivery through increased efficiency savings and reliability and accuracy of sentencing data that generating our own income.
6 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRELIMINARIES 7 1 attended international forums to support judicial reform in other countries. We have informed the local legal profession P through regular information sessions. Public access to our R online legal and sentencing information has been made easier E with the decision to provide PDF versions of our bench books L “the Commission on the Commission’s website. I M has achieved a well- Our people I One of our Commission members, Dr John Griffiths SC, N resigned in April following his appointment as a judge of the A deserved reputation Federal Court. I congratulate Dr Griffiths on his appointment R and thank him for his huge contribution to the Commission’s I work during his three-year term. E for leadership” Two organisational highlights worthy of mention are the high S staff satisfaction rate of 96% as disclosed in our annual staff survey and the exceptionally low staff turnover rate of 3%. This suggests that the Commission is an employer of choice for the 1.7 President’s foreword 1.8 Chief Executive’s message majority of our staff. It is with great pleasure that I provide the President’s role of the judiciary and functioning of the courts through I am very pleased to report on the Commission’s performance foreword to the Judicial Commission’s annual report direct community participation. The program brings and programs for 2011–12. The Commission has experienced Practices, policies and processes for 2011–12. The Commission now has 25 years of together community leaders and judicial officers through unprecedented growth this year with the use of our online An amendment to the Judicial Officers Act in June now experience as a provider of judicial education, training a number of sessions. It is designed to provide a practical research and sentencing information. requires the Commission to provide information about a and support, as a complaints handling body, and as a insight into the operation of the courts and tasks of judicial complaint to the Attorney General if the Attorney requests valuable source of sentencing research. In 2011–12, the officers, with the intention that the knowledge gained this, unless the Commission considers that it is not in the Commission enhanced its service delivery across all three by participants will be shared with their networks and Continuing judicial education public interest to provide the information. The Commission of these areas, and continued to play an invaluable role in communities, to the benefit of public awareness at large. Throughout the year, we offered 34 different judicial education must also notify the Attorney General when a complaint is supporting the effective and consistent administration of sessions including conferences, seminars, workshops and field referred to a Conduct Division. The “public interest” test justice in NSW. trips. We produced 21 publications to ensure judicial officers are protects the important separation between the executive Partnerships kept informed about legal developments and changes to court government and the judiciary. As I noted in my foreword to last year’s annual report, the practice and procedure. Our education program caters for about There is an ever-increasing need for judicial education Commission has achieved a well-deserved reputation 330 judicial officers of NSW’s courts and judicial officers attend bodies both in Australia and internationally to share Finance for leadership in the exercise of its functions, and for voluntarily. While we did not meet our target for judicial officers expertise and resources. The Judicial Commission has partnerships in Australia and the Asia Pacific. That to experience five days of education during the year, satisfaction Our net result this year was an $18,000 surplus, a pleasing maintained, and will continue to focus on, its commitment outcome in a financially difficult environment. Our income reputation has proved well deserved again this year, with our program is at a 10-year high. in this regard, exchanging information and cooperating decreased by 3.1% and our expenses decreased by 3.7%. with particular emphasis being placed on innovation in in judicial education activities with the National Judicial Government appropriation, the main source of our income, technology, community engagement and partnerships, all College of Australia, the Judicial College of Victoria and the Research and sentencing program has been reduced next financial year and we will have the while with a continuing focus on improving efficiency. International Organisation for Judicial Training, amongst The online Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) provides to carefully consider how best to deliver our high quality others. The Commission will maintain its strong focus on interrelated reference material to communicate sentencing services with reduced revenue. information and changes to the criminal law. For the first time in Technology capacity building in the Asia Pacific through its work with Our commitment to sustainability the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum and providing our history, use of JIRS exceeded 125,000 hits in March 2012 and An important part of our mission is a commitment to sustainable The Commission has focused on harnessing the experienced overall growth of 12%. Use of online criminal law assistance to judiciaries in the region. business practices. In the short-term, we have focused on advantages of new technology. In May and June 2012, the resources on our website also experienced strong growth of 51%. reducing our energy use which has decreased by 5%. In the Local Court of NSW issued an iPad to each magistrate. The overriding responsibility of a judge in a criminal trial is to medium to long-term, we will continue to consider how our The Commission not only provided training and assistance My thanks operations, products, services and activities have an impact on in the use of this technology to judicial officers, but also ensure the accused person receives a fair trial. This requires that The Commission’s many achievements are only possible the judge clearly explains to the jury which legal principles apply the environment, people and the economy. Our goal is to make developed an application and voice recognition function operational decisions in a sustainably responsible way. due to the hard work and dedication of its staff, the judicial to the jury’s task of deciding the facts and ultimately the guilt or that will allow magistrates to quickly access bench officers who contribute to its work, its Chief Executive innocence of the accused. A major focus this year for the research books and other reference materials. The Commission’s Mr Ernest Schmatt PSM; Education Director Ruth and sentencing program has been to rewrite jury directions in clear Outlook commitment to technological innovation means that it Windeler; Director, Research and Sentencing, Hugh and non-technical language in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench A key educational focus next year will be on community is well prepared to deliver its education and research awareness as we run an innovative program to inform the Donnelly; and Director, Information Management, Murali Book. This will help to ensure that the presiding judge effectively resources across new platforms, as these mediums, such public about the judiciary and its work. Our research focus Sagi PSM. I offer my personal thanks to each of them for communicates with the jury. as iPads and Tablet PCs, become increasingly important will be on publishing studies about fraud offences and the ensuring the Commission’s continuing success. to the judicial function. top 20 offences in the District Court. Our technology focus Examining complaints will be on developing applications and adapting the Judicial The 54% increase in complaints lodged with the Commission Information Research System (JIRS) for mobile devices. Community engagement during the year reverses the downward trend of last year. The increase is due to two related complainants lodging 34 similar My thanks The Commission has also demonstrated considerable The Honourable T Bathurst complaints. Four complaints about a judicial officer have been Many judicial officers generously give their time and expertise to innovation in its education programs. In October 2012, the Chief Justice of NSW referred to a Conduct Division and these will be examined next sit on our education committees and deliver education sessions. Commission will launch the “Community Awareness of President financial year. I thank those judicial officers, the Commission members for their the Judiciary Program”. This initiative, the first of its kind guidance, and the Commission staff for their hard work and in Australia, aims to improve public understanding of the diligence. Our partners Our engagement with partners centres on sharing information and providing support and advice drawn from our 25 years of experience in judicial education and building case management Ernest Schmatt PSM systems. Throughout the year, we have hosted delegations and Chief Executive
8 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRELIMINARIES 9 New magistrates 2. PERFORMANCE give their orientation program a 100% satisfaction rating.
The Commission is an independent statutory corporation established under the Judicial Officers Act 1986. This Act of the NSW Parliament sets out our corporate functions. These are to: 1. provide a continuing judicial education and training program 2. assist the courts to achieve a consistent approach to sentencing in criminal cases 3. examine complaints against judicial officers.
Our performance for 2011–12 in these three areas is reported on in this section.
Performance guide
Providing continuing judicial education and training
Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing
Examining complaints
Contents 2.1 Providing continuing judicial education and training ...... 12 2.2 Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing ...... 19 2.3 Examining complaints ...... 24
10 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE 11 Providing continuing judicial education and training 2
P E R 2.1.3 National benchmarking F The national standard for judicial officers to attend not able to excuse themselves from lengthy trials and O professional development activities is five days a year. This other judges were on leave when conferences were held. R benchmarking standard, revised in 2010, was designed However, attendance at occasional field trips, seminars M for all Australian courts. The Council of Chief Justices and workshops has increased. A of Australia and national judicial education bodies have N A new regular e-newsletter to be launched on 1 July 2012 approved the standard. (See Appendix 3 on p 113 for C further details about the national standard.) to inform judicial officers about education events will encourage attendance. E Overall attendance at our program declined this year with each judicial officer attending an average of three training With other national judicial education providers, we days (last year: 4.7 days). The decline can be attributed participated in a review of judgment writing workshops to to the Local Court annual conference not being held this streamline the design and delivery and ensure the continued financial year; this normally accounts for about 400 judicial conduct of these workshops. The review has identified education days (see Figure 3). This conference will be the need for a national basic and advanced course and to held in August 2012. Attendance at annual conferences source new workshop presenters in Australia. was lower than normal also because some judges were
Figure 3 Attendance at education sessions 2007–12
Measures 2007–08 2008-09 2009–10 2010–11 2011-12 2011–12 2012–13 result result result result target result target
% of judicial officers who attended annual 88% 86% 90% 90% 93% 77%* 90% conferences
% of voluntary attendance at magistrates’ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% induction/orientation programs
% of judicial officers who attended at least 88% 88% 90% 90% 93% 82%* 90% 2 days of judicial training
Average number of training days offered 4.9 5 5.2 5 5.3 4 5 per judicial officer per court (excluding orientation programs)
2.1 Providing continuing judicial education and training Number of judicial education days each 1,294 1,396 1,554 1,400 1,389 870 1,400 year**
Average number of training days undertaken 4.4 4.8 5.3 5 4.7 3* 5*** by each judicial officer at Judicial 2.1.1 Outcomes 2011–12 Commission programs • 6% increase in expenditure * As the Local Court annual conference was not held this financial year, magistrates were offered only 2 Local Court specific education • Attendance increased at seminars and workshops but decreased at some annual days, not 5 . conferences (see p 13) ** Note: A day of education is based on 5–6 instructional hours attended by a judicial officer . It is calculated by multiplying the number of judicial officers in attendance at judicial education programs by the duration of that educational session: eg 18 participants x 2 days = • Satisfaction at an all-time high of 95% (see p 14) 36 education days . *** National Benchmarking standard: 5 days • Provided 34 education sessions and 21 publications (see p 17)
Photo: Justice Peter McClellan AM, Chief Judge at Common Law, Supreme Court of NSW and Justice Kim Sathavy, Supreme Court of Cambodia, pictured at the Supreme 2.1.2 Financial performance Figure 2 Judicial education expenditure 2011–12 Court of NSW annual conference in August 2011. Justice Kim, a guest speaker at the conference, spoke of her harrowing experiences during the Communist Khmer Rouge We spent $3.23 million on our judicial education and occupation of Cambodia in the 1970s. training program (last year: $3.046 million), representing 55% of our overall expenditure. There was a 6% increase $3.23 M in education and training expenses. The budget for 2012–13 is less than this year; a major challenge will be to maintain the high quality and variety of our education services.
12 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Providing continuing judicial education and training 13 Providing continuing judicial education and training 2
P E R 2.1.4 Auditing our program To monitor the continuing relevance and effectiveness of Induction and orientation programs rate highly F our professional development program, we encourage New magistrates rated the usefulness and relevance of O To ensure that we meet best practice in delivering our everyone who attends a session to evaluate its usefulness, their week-long orientation program at 100% and the professional development activities, we engaged IAB content and style, and whether it met the specified learning R content, material, style and design at 96%. Participants at “Outstanding program Services last year to audit our conference program. objectives. On average, 75% of participants responded to M the two week-long national judicial orientation programs, Their report was delivered to us this year and we have the surveys (last year: 76%). The results in Figure 4 below A co-presented with the Australasian Institute of Judicial developed an action plan to systematically consider their show that we continue to meet their expectations. which has already caused N recommendations and implement those considered to Administration and the National Judicial College of C Australia, agreed that the programs sufficiently met their be useful. New procurement standards and an updated On an overall measure of satisfaction, 95% of participants me to carefully reconsider E Procedural Guide for organising events have also been who provided feedback were satisfied with the program educational needs. adopted. (last year: 93%). This is higher than the five-year average of We provided 19 judicial orientation packages to new 92% and exceeds our target of 85%. Judicial officers were and amend my style . judicial officers across all courts (last year: 20). In most positive about smaller group sessions, rating these partnership with the Local Court, we provided pre-bench at 94%–98% satisfaction. There was great enthusiasm Thanks to the faculty for induction training for four new magistrates (last year: nine). 2.1.5 Output and satisfaction with our for interactive sessions such as the magistrates’ regional See the case study on p 35. program conferences, judgment writing workshops and seminars their time and their obvious on specific and relevant topics such as cybercrime; blood Education and training output for the year slightly alcohol analysis; mental health issues; criminal sanctions; decreased from the previous year, with the delivery of 34 and defamation. commitment to making this education sessions (last year: 37) and 21 publications (last Annual court conferences continue to impress The overall satisfaction rating with the annual court year: 23) as shown in Figure 5 on p 17. Education sessions The evaluations highlighted a continuing need for: were fewer due to one annual conference not being held conference program has marginally decreased to 89% (last program work .” • interactive practical sessions this year (see discussion at 2.1.3). Publications output has year: 91%) but is consistent with the five-year average. met target and the slight decline from last year is due to • fewer lecture style sessions We organised four annual court conferences (last year: Participant at Magistrates’ Orientation Program, a focus on a major reissue of one our bench books. More • sufficient time allowed for group discussion within six). The Local Court annual conference was not held this July 2011 information about education and training strategies is sessions financial year but will be held in August 2012. found in Part 3.1 on p 30. • knowledgeable and engaging presenters • a written paper for each session, and • sessions tailored for different participants’ individual learning styles.
Figure 4 Satisfaction ratings 2007–12
Program 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 % % % % % Annual Conferences 89 88 87 91 89 Orientation Programs 97 99 100 100 97 Workshops – regional & metropolitan magistrates 94 92 95 95 96 Children’s Court Conferences n/a n/a 92 96 94 Workshops – judicial skills 92 95 96 93 98 Supreme Court Seminars n/a 90 91 99 96 Industrial Relations Commission Seminars 90 91 100 96 94 Land and Environment Court Seminars n/a 88 89 90 97 District Court Seminars 89 91 90 92 97 Local Court Seminars n/a n/a n/a 98 98 Cross-Jurisdictional Seminars 90 95 95 92 n/a Ngara Yura Program 89 87 90 94 93 Gaol Visits n/a 95 86 85 n/a Average Satisfaction Rating (from all participants) 91 90 91 93 95 Target satisfaction rating 85%
n/a: no formal evaluation or no program held
Annual court conferences are an important way to inform judicial officers about developments in the law and also to promote collegiality. Justice John Basten and Justice Nigel Rein at the Supreme Court Annual Conference held in August 2011.
14 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Providing continuing judicial education and training 15 Providing continuing judicial education and training 2
P E R Aboriginal cultural awareness program Figure 5 Conference, seminars and publications provided 2007–12 F continues to inspire O “Fabulous training . Will be During the year, we held three successful Aboriginal 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 target actual target R cultural awareness events (last year: two). A major 2011–12 2011–12 2012–13 M extremely beneficial daily conference which examined issues related to the Number of different programs 34 38 39 37 35 34 35 A overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in the criminal Annual conferences 5 5 5 6 4 4 5 N justice system was rated at 91%. A judicial visit to the and I will definitely change Workshops — country & 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 C Redfern Aboriginal community and the Indigenous College E the way I do things .” of Excellence gained an overall satisfaction rating of 100%. metropolitan magistrates Participants at a seminar on the United Nations Permanent Workshops — judgment writing 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 Forum on Indigenous Issues rated this at 87%. More Participant at a judgment writing workshop, Pre-bench training sessions1 10 4 16 10 6 4 6 information about this program can be found on p 34. December 2011 Week-long orientation programs2 2 3 4 3 2 3 2 Cross-jurisdictional seminars 4 1 1 3 2 0 2 Publications are valued Ngara Yura Program 5 4 3 2 2 3 2 Supreme Court seminars 1 1 2 2 2 4 2 Skills-based workshops We met our target to provide 21 print and online publications (last year: 23) as a way to inform judicial officers about Industrial Relations Commission 3 2 3 3 3 0 1 During the year, we offered four workshops (last year: changes to the law, court procedure and community values. seminars four) to hone judicial skills and these gained an overall Publications output over the last five years is shown in Land and Environment Court – 5 7 6 6 6 6 satisfaction rating of 97%. Judicial officers continue to Figure 5 on p 17. Use of the conference paper database has seminars/workshops/field trips find that judgment writing workshops greatly refine their increased by almost 10% as shown in Figure 6 on p 17. communication skills. Ninety-six per cent of judicial District Court seminars 4 4 3 3 4 5 4 officers who provided feedback indicated that they have Local Court seminars – – – 3 1 1 4 changed the way they write judgments since completing a Children’s Court seminars – – 2 2 2 3 2 workshop and 76% said they would participate in further Judicial officers’ feedback show how we can workshops. Land and Environment Court commissioners Drug Court Practitioners’ 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 improve Conference rated their two-day judgment writing workshop at 98% for usefulness and relevance, and 97% for content, materials, Gaol visit 0 2 3 1 2 0 2 design and style. Publications including bench 24 24 23 23 21 21 21 “There was in several sessions a book updates, bulletins, journals, tendency for lecture style which education monographs and training DVDs Regional programs rate highly does not encourage participation/
Satisfaction with the two Local Court regional conferences discussion.” 1 The number of pre-bench training sessions is determined by the number of appointments to the Local Court each year . was at an all-time high, with magistrates rating these at 2 Includes participants from NSW at the National Judicial Orientation Program, jointly conducted with the National Judicial College of Australia 97% (last year: 95%). “Some more practical examples, such and the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration . as how the intensive supervision is implemented and what it involves.” Field trips are stimulating Two field trips conducted during the year were very well “More dialogue, less statistics. More received with judicial officers rating them both at 96% Figure 6 Conference paper database use 2010–12 (last year 99% and 85%). discussion of issues and possible solutions. Ideas exchange needs to Court 2010–11 hits 2011–12 hits % change Target
happen.” Supreme Court 148 199 34% 10%
Seminar program is highly regarded District Court 289 321 11% 10% “The time available is limited and the Judicial officers continue to value our regular twilight Local Court 600 701 16% 10% seminars that cover a range of topics, rating them at 96% program is possibly ‘ambitious’ — Land and Environment Court 90 56 37% 10% (last year 95%). During the year, we organised 18 seminars don’t fill up every minute but allow for (last year: 19). Highlights of these can be found on p 33. Industrial Relations Commission 29 19 34% 10% more discussion and reflection at the Total 1156 1296 12% 10% time.”
“I don’t leave home without my Bench Book — it is a fantastic publication .” Local Court magistrate
16 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Providing continuing judicial education and training 17 Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 2
P E R Computer training and support F All magistrates were issued with iPads in May and June Figure 7 below which compares the fluctuating demand for O of 2012. We are providing help and training in this new computer support over a three-year period. R technology and there has been a sharp increase in calls M We provided 109.5 hours of computer training for judicial for assistance to the help desk and for one-on-one training A since the roll-out. To meet initial training needs, we have officers (last year 44). We made 10 visits to judicial officers’ chambers in response to individual requests for assistance N planned a number of regional visits to assist magistrates C and have created an iPad e-bulletin with useful advice and (last year: 23) and provided eight group sessions of face- E information which is regularly sent to magistrates. to-face training to 146 attendees (last year: three sessions).
Until the iPads were provided, computer training and help The help desk service is provided Monday to Saturday desk requests averaged only seven enquiries a week. This from 7.30 am to 7.30 pm by computer, email, and mobile reflects increasing computer skill levels and is shown in phone.
Figure 7 Computer support 2009–12
120 106 109 100
80
60
Hours 44 40 38
23 20 18
0 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 2.2 Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing Year
Hours of computer training Visits 2.2.1 Outcomes 2011–12 • 9% increase in expenditure Challenges • 51% growth in use of online sentencing and criminal law resources (see p 20) • Encouraging judicial officers to meet the national standard of five days a year of professional development. • 9% increase in criminal law information (see p 21) • Ensuring high attendance at annual conferences. • Use of the online Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) at an all-time high • Continuing to offer a range of activities with limited resources. (see p 22) • Made 11 major enhancements to JIRS (see p 22) Looking ahead 2012–13 • Provide 35 education sessions and 21 publications. • Develop an online resource for Children’s Court magistrates. 2.2.2 Financial performance Figure 8 Research and sentencing expenditure 2011–12 • Encourage judicial officers to meet the national standard and undertake We spent $2.15 million on our research and sentencing five days of voluntary education. program (last year: $1.97 million), representing 37% of • Continue to emphasise relevant, interesting and interactive sessions our overall expenditure. There was a 9% increase in tailored to judicial officers’ individual needs. research and sentencing expenses. As the budget for 2012–13 is less than this year, a major challenge will be • Provide more assistance to presenters to help improve presentation to maintain the high quality and range of our research style. and sentencing program. $2.15 M • Introduce a new evaluation process to minimise conditioned responses from program participants.
18 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 1919 Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 2
P E R 2.2.3 National benchmarking Bench Book information informs the courts and Communicated criminal law developments • discussing ongoing concerns with court staff about F data processing in relation to recording pleas, coding legal practitioners We communicate important criminal law developments by Comparing our performance with other State, national and modifiers and electronic lodgement of indictments O international providers of sentencing information is not The online use of our bench books has increased, posting news items and summaries of criminal law cases R • generating error reports for the Audit and Risk both through JIRS and the website. Page views of the on JIRS. Output of items and summaries has increased this currently possible as these providers either do not have Management Committee. M a directly comparable online system and/or information Sentencing Bench Book and the Criminal Trial Courts year by 9%. We posted 190 items on the “Announcements/ A about usage of similar systems is not publicly available. Bench Book have increased on JIRS by 6% and 10% Recent Law” component of JIRS about important cases N respectively, and on the website, by 78% and 28% and new legislation (last year: 154) and published 158 C summaries of important sentencing judgments (last year: Our research program is highly regarded respectively. See Figures 9 and 10. We met out target E to publish three updates to each of these bench books, 165). Judicial officers, the courts, legal agencies and the legal 2.2.4 Output and satisfaction with our consistent with last year’s output. (See p 31 for an profession have high regard for our independent research program explanation of a bench book.) This year, we published four Special Bulletins (last year: and sentencing information. While the primary method two) to inform judicial officers of the details and impact of for accessing our information is through the Judicial Research and sentencing performance for the year met, important criminal cases. Information Research System (JIRS), from time to time and in some cases exceeded, our targets. The output we field enquiries from judicial officers and the legal We posted items explaining new criminal legislation on of criminal law information published on the Judicial profession. This year we responded to 13 requests for JIRS either shortly before or on the day the legislation Information Research System (JIRS) increased by 9%. research information from judicial officers (last year: 10) commenced. Within 24 hours of receipt, we posted Overall use of JIRS grew by 12%. There has been a and 33 non-judicial enquiries (last year: 37). Research court judgments on JIRS. Within one week of receipt, we significant 51% increase in the use of sentencing and staff gave five conference and seminar presentations posted items explaining significant judgments. We also criminal law resources on our website. Our publications about the research program (last year: one) for which we summarised: output has met target, as detailed below. Details of these “I have been assisted by received very positive feedback. Information about these publications are found on p 39 and in Appendix 8 on p 119. • every significant criminal High Court decision within a presentations is found in Appendix 15 on p 124. day to a week of the court handing down its decision Information about our Research and Sentencing program a Judicial Commission • every Court of Criminal Appeal decision where the and strategies is found in 3.2 on p 36. court altered the sentence or sentences imposed at monograph, ‘Sentenced first instance • important interstate appellate decisions concerning Research studies assist the courts and legal Homicides in New South Commonwealth sentencing with a focus on people practitioners smuggling cases “I thought [the] This year, we met our target to publish one research Wales’ .” • all cases where the standard non-parole provisions monograph and one Sentencing Trends and & Issues were applied presentation to the Public paper (last year: two monographs). The use of research Justice Hidden, R v Mitchell [2012] NSWSC 694 at [18] • other selected appeals which involved a sentencing monographs on JIRS and our website has increased by principle. Defenders’ Chambers 44% and 48% respectively. The Supreme Court of NSW Due to competing priorities, principally the writing of major in the case of R v Mitchell referred with approval to our research studies in the first half of 2012, we were unable research monograph Sentenced Homicides in New South was excellent .” to meet our target to load all case summaries within three Wales. weeks of decision. We met our target to load statistics within NSW Public Defender two months of receipt for the Local Court and Children’s Court. The target of three months for the other courts was not met due to ongoing problems with the timeliness and quality of sentencing data received (see below). Figure 9 Criminal and sentencing publications accessed on the Commission’s website
200,000 Data accuracy remains a significant challenge for us
150,000 Due to ongoing problems with the accuracy and timeliness Figure 10 Criminal law and sentencing publications accessed of sentencing data received from the courts, our targets on JIRS for loading statistical information onto JIRS continue to 100,000 be affected. This is because of the extra time required for Users 2010–11 2011–12 Change hits hits %
Page hits research staff to audit the data. Sentencing Bench Book 40,857 43,449 +6.3 50,000 The timeliness and quality of the data have improved this Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book 31,472 34,727 +10.3 year as we have worked with the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) and court staff to address these Research monographs 999 1,441 +44.2 0 problems. There remain continuing data quality problems. Sentencing Trends 450 380 –15.5 Criminal Sentencing Sentencing Research We responded to this challenge by: Trial Courts Bench Book Trends monographs Bench Book • allocating more research staff to audit the raw data • providing regular assistance and feedback about our audits to BOCSAR in accordance with our 2010–11 2011–12 Memorandum of Understanding with that organisation
20 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 21 Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 2
P E R Use of online resources at an all-time high below shows how the use of JIRS is split and the change F in use over a two-year period. The growth in JIRS usage is The use of JIRS continues to grow. JIRS had an average O shown in Figures 12 and 13. of 99,172 hits each month and exceeded 125,000 hits for R the first time in a single month during March 2012. Judicial Use of our online sentencing and criminal law publications M officers and their support staff in the Supreme, District has also strongly increased on the Commission’s website A and Local Courts (25%, 20% and 18% respectively) have as shown in Figure 9 on p 20. N increased their use of JIRS. Government agencies are C also increasingly using JIRS (11%) as are law firms and The Court of Criminal Appeal expressly referred to JIRS E community organisations (10%). Professional associations’ statistics in 50 judgments delivered this year (last year: 85). use fell 3% over the year. Overall, government agencies, including the Director of Public Prosecutions, Public Defenders, and Legal Aid NSW, are the most frequent direct users of JIRS (48%). Prosecution and defence Improving resources on JIRS lawyers often submit JIRS information in the higher criminal During the year, we made 10 major enhancements to the courts, especially the Court of Criminal Appeal. Figure 11 Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) (last year: 10). Details of these can be found at 3.2.3 on p 40.
Figure 11 JIRS usage 2010–12
Users 2010–11 Use of JIRS 2011–12 Use of JIRS Change hits % hits % %
Supreme Court 10,795 1.0 13,452 1.1 +24.6
District Court 107,140 10.1 128,238 10.8 +19.7
Local Court 149,139 14.0 175,649 14.8 +17.8
Land and Environment Court 2,471 0.2 2,102 0.2 –14.9
Industrial Relations Commission 839 0.1 592 0.0 –29.4
Government agencies1 515,692 48.4 571,143 48.0 +10.8
Professional associations2 56,254 5.3 54,562 4.6 –3.0
Other subscribers3 222,121 20.9 244,321 29.5 +10.0
Total 1,064,451 100.0 1,190,059 100.0 +11.8
1 Includes staff of the NSW and Commonwealth DPP, Department of Attorney General and Justice, NSW Legal Aid, NSW Police Prosecutors, and any other State or federal public sector agency, excluding judicial officers and their associates . 2 The Bar Association of NSW and Law Society of NSW . 3 Includes law firms, universities, libraries and community organisations . Our Systems team works with the Research and Sentencing team to maintain the currency, accuracy and timeliness of the Judicial Information Research System (JIRS). Pictured from l-r Rowena Johns (Principal Research Officer, Legal), Trish Poletti (Principal Research Officer, Statistics) and Jason He (Systems Officer, Programmer). Figure 12 Number of JIRS pages accessed each month in 2011–12
150,000
125,000
100,000 2011–12 averaged 99,172 pages 2010–11 averaged 88,704 pages 75,000 2009–10 averaged 84,312 pages Page hits 50,000 2008–09 averaged 56,722 pages Challenge 25,000 • Providing statistical information of a high quality in circumstances where data accuracy 0 continues to be a problem. Our principal statistician produces regular error reports to Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Target 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 90,000 inform the Audit and Risk Management Committee.
Figure 13 Number of JIRS pages accessed each year 2006–12 Looking ahead 2012–13 1,190,059 1200,000 1,100,000 1,011,704 1,064,451 • Continue to work with the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research and the Department 1000,000 932,209 of Attorney General and Justice to resolve the problems with the quality of sentencing 800,000 680,664 data provided to the Commission. 600,000 550,774
Page hits 400,000
200,000
0 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Target
22 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Assisting the courts to achieve consistency in sentencing 23 Examing complaints 2
P E R 2.3.3 Benchmarking F The Judicial Commission is currently the only Australian Figure 15 Time taken to finalise preliminary examination of O organisation that examines complaints against judicial complaints 2007–12 R officers. We benchmark our results with the Canadian M Judicial Council and the Office for Judicial Complaints in 3 months 6 months 9 months 12 months A the United Kingdom. These organisations aim to finalise (target (target N the majority of complaints that do not require further 90%) 100%) C investigation within three months of lodgement. 2007–08 73% 99% 100% – E 2008–09 66% 92% 100% – This year, we conducted the preliminary examination of 26% of complaints within three months (last year: 34%). 2009–10 61% 91% 98% 98% Within six months we had examined 68% of complaints. 2010–11 39% 95% 98% 100%
We were unable to meet our target to finalise the majority 2011–12 26% 68% 97% 100% of complaints within three months as there were delays in obtaining information for a number of complaints. However we met our target to conduct the preliminary examination of all complaints within 12 months. Figure 15 compares the time taken to examine complaints over five years against our targets.
2.3.4 Output and satisfaction with Figure 16 Complaint particulars our program 2010–11 2011–12 Complaints made to the Commission during the year Complaints pending at 30 June 22 26 are the highest they have been in five years, with a 54% increase that reversed the downward trend of last year. Complaints made during the year 60 110 We received 110 complaints (last year: 60) (see Figure 16). Total number of complaints 82 136 This is because two related complainants made 34 similar Complaints examined and dismissed 50 79 complaints about judicial officers. An analysis of the most under sections 18 and 20 of the Judicial common causes for complaints shows that the majority Officers Act of complaints (48%) arise from allegations of a failure to Complaints referred to head of 3 7 give a fair hearing. Most complaints of this nature were jurisdiction dismissed. See p 27 for more information about trends in Complaints referred to Conduct Division – 4 the types of complaints made. Complaints withdrawn 3 7 Total number of matters finalised 56 97 2.3 Examining complaints Complaints pending at 30 June 26 39
2.3.1 Outcomes 2011–12 Complaints received This year, 65 individuals made 110 complaints about 79 Figure 17 Complaints received and examined 2007–12 • 55% decrease in expenditure as there was no Conduct Division judicial officers. One complainant made 23 complaints. 120 • Received 110 complaints about 79 judicial officers (see p 25) Another complainant made 11 complaints and 12 110 complainants made two complaints each. The rest of the 100 90 • Examined 90 complaints (see p 26) complaints were lodged individually. Thirty-nine complaints 80 were pending as at 30 June 2012. Figure 16 shows how 66 66 70 64 60 • Monitored trends show that allegations of failure to give a fair hearing continue to be we dealt with all complaints during this year and Figure 17 60 55 56 49
compares the numbers of complaints received and examined Number the most common cause of complaints (see p 27) 40 over the last five years. 20 0 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 2.3.2 Financial performance Figure 14 Complaints expenditure 2011–12 We spent $482,000 on our complaints function (last year: Complaints received Complaints examined $1.076 million), representing 8% of overall expenditure. Complaints’ expenditure decreased by 55% this year as Conduct Division expenses were a residual $33,000 (last year: $642,000). (See p 44 and Appendix 1 on p 109 for information about a Conduct Division). Four complaints $0.48 M have been referred to a Conduct Division so expenses will increase next year.
24 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Examining complaints 25 Examing complaints 2
P E R Complaints examined and summarily dismissed Monitored complaints to identify trends merits, but the Commission cannot correct an allegedly F wrong decision. A court of appeal is the appropriate avenue The Commission examined and dismissed 79 (81%) dismissed after the preliminary examination as a higher Each year, we track patterns in the type and volume of O for determining whether the judicial officer made an error in complaints under section 20 of the Judicial Officers Act number of complaints (11) were referred for further action complaints to identify areas that may need to be addressed law or fact or there was a miscarriage of justice. R because our preliminary examination found that there was no (see below). Figure 18 shows the percentage of complaints through our judicial education program. Figure 20 below M wrong conduct to warrant further examination or the judicial dismissed under section 20 over five years compared provides an overview of patterns in complaints over the past Incompetence: Ten complaints alleged judicial A officer complained about was no longer a judicial officer. with all complaints examined. Figure 19 shows the criteria five years. incompetence (last year: three). This category accounted N This is less than the five-year average of 88% of complaints adopted under section 20 for dismissing complaints. for 11% of all complaints. C E In 2011–12, we identified the following patterns Inappropriate comments and discourtesy: eight Figure 18 Number of complaints examined and dismissed complaints alleged that a judicial officer made Common causes of complaint: allegations of failure to give inappropriate comments and six complaints alleged 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 a fair hearing and an apprehension of bias continue to be the discourtesy. These two categories accounted for 16% of all Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints Complaints most common grounds of complaint. In 2011–12, these two complaints received this year (last year: 15%). examined dismissed examined dismissed examined dismissed examined dismissed examined dismissed categories accounted for 81% of complaints (last year: 72%) under s 20 under s 20 under s 20 under s 20 under s 20 with 44 complaints of alleged failure to give a fair hearing Complaints arising from AVO proceedings: some 66 61 49 43 64 56 56 50 90 79 and 29 complaints of alleged bias. This type of complaint is complaints arise out of proceedings involving applications often made by an unsuccessful party to legal proceedings for apprehended violence orders (AVOs). In a number of 92% 88% 88% 89% 81% and by a person who represented him or herself in court. instances, the complaints arose from a misunderstanding Complaints of bias are often accompanied by allegations of of the judicial role. The trend has decreased this year with particular conduct by the judicial officer concerned. 8% of complaints arising from AVO proceedings (last year: Figure 19 Criteria for dismissing complaints 33%). Substitution for appeals: a complaint is often made Criteria Section Number of that a judicial officer made a wrong decision. This type Complaints by self-represented litigants: another complaints of complaint is usually made when a party to litigation is continuing trend we have noted is the high proportion of The complaint was one that the Commission was required not to deal with and having regard to all the circumstances of 20(1)(a) 6 aggrieved by an unfavourable decision but, for one reason complaints made by persons who have conducted their the case, further consideration of the complaint would be or was unnecessary or unjustifiable. & (h) or another, does not wish to appeal to a higher court. own litigation before the courts. The complaint was frivolous, vexatious or not in good faith and having regard to all the circumstances of the 20(1)(b) 3 Instead, a personal complaint against the judicial decision case, further consideration of the complaint would be or was unnecessary or unjustifiable. & (h) maker is made to the Commission, frequently alleging bias or incompetence. Such a complaint is dealt with on its The person complained about was no longer a judicial officer. 20(1)(g) 10
The matter complained about occurred at too remote a time to justify further consideration and having regard to all the 20(1)(d) 2 circumstances of the case, further consideration of the complaint would be or was unnecessary or unjustifiable. & (h)
The matter complained about occurred at too remote a time to justify further consideration and related to the 20(1)(d), 2 exercise of a judicial or other function that is or was subject to adequate appeal or review rights, and having (f) & (h) Figure 20 Common causes of complaint: basis of allegation regard to all the circumstances of the case, further consideration of the complaint would be or was unnecessary or unjustifiable. 50 50
The complaint related to the exercise of a judicial or other function that is or was subject to adequate appeal or 20(1)(f) 31 40 review rights and having regard to all the circumstances of the case, further consideration of the complaint would & (h) 40 be or was unnecessary or unjustifiable. 30 30 Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, further consideration of the complaint would be or was 20(1)(h) 25 unnecessary or unjustifiable. 20 20
10 10 Number of complaints 0 0 Failure to Incompetence Collusion Delay Referred seven complaints to the relevant head Attorney General referred two matters give fair Bias Inappropriate Discourtesy Other of jurisdiction The Attorney General of NSW may refer a matter to the hearing comments The Commission referred seven complaints that were not Commission under s 16(1) of the Judicial Officers Act and summarily dismissed to the relevant head of jurisdiction this is treated as a complaint. This year, the Commission 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 (last year: three). This action was taken because in the received two references from the Attorney General (last Commission’s opinion, while the complaints did not year: none). warrant the attention of a Conduct Division, some further action was required. The complainants and the judicial officers concerned were advised of this action. Responded to informal enquiries Challenge We attended to 426 telephone, face-to face and written • Meeting our target to finalise the preliminary examination of the majority of enquiries from potential complainants (last year: 450). complaints within three months. Referred four complaints to a Conduct Division Following the preliminary examination, the Commission referred four complaints about a judicial officer to a Looking ahead 2012–13 Conduct Division (last year: none). The examinations will commence during the next financial year. • A Conduct Division will examine four complaints. • Aim to examine the majority of complaints that do not require further investigation within three months and examine all complaints received within 12 months.
26 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PERFORMANCE — Examining complaints 27 “The Commission is 3. PROGRAMS light years ahead with its iPad app.”
Local Court magistrate
The NSW public expects that their judicial officers will be impartial, independent and perform to the highest professional standard. Judicial officers must be skilled in all aspects of the judicial role and continually informed about changes to the law, court procedure and community values.
Our mission is to promote the highest standards of judicial behaviour and to foster judicial capacity and high quality decision making. The Commission realises this mission by providing education and training programs, assisting the courts to achieve consistency in approach to sentencing and examining complaints against judicial officers.
Program guide
Continuing judicial education and training
Research and sentencing
Examining complaints
Contents 3.1 Continuing judicial education and training ...... 30 3.2 Research and sentencing ...... 36 3.3 Examining complaints ...... 42
28 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS 29 Continuing judicial education and training 3
P R O 3.1.2 Strategies 3.1.3 Education and training G Our judicial education program aims to continuously renew achievements and innovations R professional education, sharpen judicial skills and maintain 2011–12 A the highest professional judicial standards. M Local Court moves to iPads S As we work with judicial officers who are experienced and skilled in the law, it is essential that our programs are well The NSW Department of Attorney General and Justice designed and appropriate for them. Adult education is provided an iPad to every magistrate in NSW in May and most effective when it draws out the adult’s experience. June 2012. We have commenced specialised training for With a focus on interactive learning, our approach involves magistrates to learn how to use their iPads effectively participants in the learning process and is based on and have developed an application and voice recognition enhancing their skills, attitudes and knowledge in a judicially- function so that magistrates can quickly access their online relevant environment. As individuals have varied learning publications and the Commission’s Judicial Information styles, we provide a range of programs, presentation styles, Research System (JIRS). This exciting innovation means and resources to suit different needs. Our varied program that print publications will, in time, be superseded, and the includes: Commission is well prepared to deliver all our education and research resources to iPads and tablet PCs. For more • induction and orientation sessions for new judicial officers information on the JIRS program, see p 38 below. • annual conferences for all NSW courts • skills-based workshops • seminars Reporting change through our publishing • field trips program • Aboriginal cultural awareness Regular online and print publications are an efficient way to • digital and multi-media resources communicate change to judicial officers and to promote an • online and print publications including a conference exchange of ideas. Our flagship publications, the Judicial paper database Officers’ Bulletin and The Judicial Review inform judicial • computer training and support. officers about current legal issues and changes to court practice and procedure. Articles published in these journals The performance of our education and training function this year are detailed in Appendix 7 on p 118. is detailed at 2.1 on p 12. Our judicial education program is judge-led and judge-driven. Our professional educator, Our bench books are practical, loose leaf reference works Ruth Windeler, identifies judicial training needs and that assist judicial officers to conduct trials. They include develops materials and courses by working with the relevant legislation, case law, sentencing principles, Standing Advisory Committee on Judicial Education, the procedural guidelines, suggested jury directions and education committee of each court, and the committees sample orders. Bench books help improve consistency 3.1 Continuing judicial education and training of judicial officers that oversee our publications. Concerns of judicial approach and reduce the risk of appealable raised by the public in the complaints process also inform error. Committees comprised of current and retired judicial how we design the program. Figure 21 below shows how officers, executive members of the Commission and this process works and Appendix 4 on p 114 gives details Commission staff write and update the bench books. about our committees. Judicial officers who serve on these Considerable effort is required to maintain their currency to committees generously give their time and expertise. ensure that changes are reported quickly and accurately. 3.1.1 Highlights Bench books are available online through the Judicial Our continuing judicial education policy incorporates the Information Research System (JIRS), our website and as a • Commenced training for magistrates on iPad technology (see p 31) national standard for judicial professional development hardcopy publication for judicial officers. (see Appendix 3 on p 113). • Reissued the Civil Trials Bench Book (see p 32) • Introduced an audience response system to enhance conference and seminar Figure 21 Judicial education design process participation (see p 32) Standing • Added podcasts to the conference paper database (see p 32) Judicial Advisory Judicial Experts in Commission Committee Community Complaints officers the field members on Judicial • Provided PDF versions of bench books to download on iPads and other tablet devices Education (see p 32)
• Organised a major Aboriginal Cultural Awareness conference (see p 34)
Education Director and Court Education and Publications Committees
The Commission’s computer training officer Joy Blunt (standing) is pictured with the Chief Magistrate of the Local Court, Judge Graeme Henson, Deputy Chief Magistrates Jane Mottley (seated, centre) and Jane Culver EDUCATION PROGRAM (seated, right) and Executive Officer to the Chief Magistrate, Jacinta Haywood.
30 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Continuing judicial education and training 31 Continuing judicial education and training 3
P R O Highlights from our publishing program this year include: Conducting field trips Highlights from the seminar program • The former Chief Judge of the Compensation Court, G the Honourable Michael Campbell QC, conducted a • issuing major plain English revisions of jury directions Land and Environment court judges and commissioners Our seminar program offers a wide range of relevant and practical seminar for judicial officers on controlling the R in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book educationally sound specific topics for judicial officers. visited Number 1 Bligh Street, Sydney, a six-star energy court. Participants learned about effective strategies to A • issuing a revised edition of the Civil Trials Bench efficiency (NABERS) rated building. The field trip provided • Two seminars examined cybercrime, technology trends deal with a reluctant witness, selfrepresented litigant M Book to inform judicial officers about managing civil a fascinating insight for the visitors into state of the art and electronic evidence. These looked at the impact of and difficult counsel, as well as discussing contempt S proceedings and new material on defamation cases green building technology. technology trends on the collection and presentation of court, judicial demeanour, pre-trial preparation and • publishing a major update to the Sexual Assault of electronic evidence for criminal and civil trials. court room technique. Handbook, an online resource to assist judicial officers Children’s court magistrates toured the Juniperina Juvenile Mr Matthew Nevin of the Australian Federal Police’s hearing and making decisions in sexual assault crimes Justice Centre at Lidcombe to learn about programs High Tech Crime Operations unit demonstrated the Appendix 6 on p 118 provides a full list of our judicial • publishing the findings and recommendations of a provided to juveniles in detention, the role of the Children’s latest equipment used and gave an overview of the education seminars, workshops and field trips presented major survey of judicial officers’ needs in domestic Guardian, and legal developments in the care jurisdiction of Cyberlaw and Prosecution Support Project, an initiative throughout the year. violence cases the Children’s Court. to improve the presentation of electronic evidence in court and provide the judiciary with training resources • as a sustainability measure, providing online PDF in cybercrime. versions of our loose leaf publications to download on eBook readers and tablet PCs. Improving communication skills • Judicial officers had the opportunity to learn about blood alcohol analysis equipment. Associate Professor Details of all our publications are in Appendix 8 on p 119. Clear and authoritative communication is an essential Anthony Moynham of the Sydney Forensic Medicine judicial skill and one that can be refined in skills-based and Science Network at Sydney University Medical “Thoroughly informative, workshops. A two-day judgment writing workshop School outlined the pharmacology of alcohol and for the Land and Environment Court explored new medical issues involved with the instrument. small gathering worked Conference paper database territory by examining how to overcome writer’s block. A • Representatives from the Tristan Jepson Memorial This database is a rich educational resource for judicial communications workshop for the Land and Environment Foundation presented a seminar that explored the well . I support more cross- officers in city and regional locations. The majority of Court outlined the processes of mutual observation, 360 mental health problems that can arise in high pressured papers from our conference and seminar program are degree feedback and communication. When engaged in and fast-paced legal workplaces. jurisdictional seminars .” loaded onto the database to allow for the sharing of effectively, these processes will greatly assist judges and • Former Family Court judge, the Honourable Jenny knowledge, expertise and information across jurisdictions. commissioners to improve their communication skills. Boland AM, presented a popular seminar on the United Twilight Seminar participant This year we have added audio podcasts of select Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and how seminars for judicial officers unable to attend an event. this has been interpreted by Australian appellate courts. Educating through film Our professional educator, Ruth Windeler works with the Standing Advisory Committee on We assisted the Department of Attorney General and Judicial Education to identify judicial training needs and develop courses and material. Pictured Promoting interactive learning Justice to edit and finalise a script for a DVD, Justice with Ruth (l-r) are some members of the committee, Judge John Nicholson SC, Justice Michael Walton and Justice John Basten (Chair of the Committee). To engage participants more fully in the learning process, Journey. This DVD will help to prepare people attending we are introducing an audience response system into court as witnesses or victims of crime. our education program. This is a tool to create interactive presentations by using simple, intuitive polling software and response devices. The tool facilitates two-way Providing distance education communication by allowing the presenter to ask questions of the audience and receive and collate their responses To provide educational opportunities for rural and regional for immediate display. This innovation was used at magistrates, we have added audio files of select seminars the National Judicial Orientation Program in May 2012 to the conference paper database, available through the with great success and we have focussed on training Judicial Information Research System (JIRS). Judicial Commission staff in its application this year. Next year, we officers unable to attend a session can play these recordings plan to introduce it into select seminars and conferences. in their chambers, at home or in the car. The two northern and southern regional Local Court conferences provide magistrates with interactive learning opportunities, with a focus on practical scenarios and peer-based learning. Connecting judicial officers through annual court conferences Annual conferences for each court are an important way to exchange ideas and information and promote collegiality. The conference programs are broad in range and include “Many ideas informing court-specific sessions and important updates on legal and policy developments. my work have been A complete list of topics presented at the conference program is found at Appendix 5 on p 115. reinforced by the high quality presentations we have heard .” Participant at Land and Environment Court Annual Conference 2012
32 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Continuing judicial education and training 33 Continuing judicial education and training 3
P R O Providing Aboriginal Cultural Awareness: the 3.1.4 Case studies G Ngara Yura program R Educating judicial officers about Aboriginal culture and A Orientation for new magistrates Indigenous disadvantage is an important part of our mission. M New magistrates appointed to the Local Court attend a including the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal S The Ngara Yura (meaning “to hear and listen to the people” week-long residential program during their first 18 months Deaths in Custody have not succeeded in lowering the in Eora) program grew out of recommendations of the Royal on the bench. The magistrates who participated rated the high rates of Indigenous interactions with police, the courts Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in 1991: these usefulness and relevance of their orientation program at or correctional centres. can be found at Appendix 9 on p 120. We employ an Aboriginal 100% satisfaction. Project Officer, Mrs Tammy Wright, who works with a committee In September 2011, the Commission’s Ngara Yura to develop education and training activities. Membership of the The program informs new magistrates about the skills and committee organised a major conference to follow on from committee is found in Appendix 4 on p 114. practices of being a magistrate with a focus on: a similar successful conference held in May 2009. More than 70 delegates from around Australia attended the event • confronting biases, attitudes and values Community visits are central to the Ngara Yura program and which was an opportunity for judicial officers to interact • appropriate behaviour in and out of court these are designed to promote cross-cultural understanding. with Indigenous Elders, community leaders, academics, A group of judicial officers visited the National Centre of • judicial ethics government officers and health care professionals. Indigenous Excellence and the inner city Redfern community • learning effective communication The Chief Justice of NSW, the Honourable Tom Bathurst, in March and met with community leaders, Elders and the • judicial skills including sentencing and court craft, and opened the two-day conference which focussed on: Redfern Police Commander. The group saw at first-hand how • implementing best practice. Redfern’s once dilapidated and crime-ridden area “The Block” • the legacy of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody is being revitalised into a multi-purpose cultural, commercial Magistrates participate in interactive sessions using role • the underlying social and psychological causes of and residential centre. Positive relations between residents plays, case scenarios, problem solving, feedback, and offending and the Police are a crucial element in this transformation. We practical, comparative exercises to develop the judicial reported on the visit in the Judicial Officers’ Bulletin and this skills, knowledge and attitudes they require in the State’s • the impact of custody on families and communities was sent to all judicial officers in NSW, justice sector agencies busiest court. Each session provides a building block for • factors that contribute to recidivism and law libraries. the next session, and by week’s end, a fully integrated • strategies to reduce the impact of imprisonment. Redfern community Elders Pastor Ray Minnecon and Ms Millie program has been unveiled. The overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the criminal We reported on the conference in the Judicial Officers’ justice system was the subject of a major conference that we Ingram spoke about the transformation of the Redfern community to judicial officers during a judicial visit in March 2012. Bulletin. This is distributed to all judicial officers, law held in September 2011: see the case study below. libraries and justice sector agencies in NSW and made Understanding Indigenous overrepresentation many of the papers available through the conference paper A Ngara Yura section has been added to our website that in the criminal justice system database. includes information about the program, the Committee Pictured at athe opening of the “Exchanging Ideas” conference in The overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the members, community visits and conferences and seminars. The National Judicial College of Australia assisted with Sydney, September 2011, are (l-r) the Chief Justice of NSW, the criminal justice system has long been a cause of national This can be accessed at www.judcom.nsw.gov.au. funding for the conference. Honourable Tom Bathurst; Elder Uncle Max Eulo; Ms Cathy Eulo; concern. Decades of various government initiatives the Commisison’s Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM; and the Chair of the Ngara Yura Committee, Judge Stephen Norrish QC.
Challenges • Encouraging presenters to adopt more interactive presentation styles in their sessions. • With limited resources, continuing to offer sessions tailored to individual judicial officers. • Testing and then incorporating into our education program the sessions designed as a result of learning from the Faculty Development Workshops held last year.
Looking ahead 2012–13 • Design and deliver learning styles workshops to assist judicial officers to understand theirs and their colleagues’ different learning styles. • Deliver a regular email newsletter from 1 July 2012 to all judicial officers to advise them about forthcoming education sessions and recently published material on the conference paper database. • Use an audience response system in some of our education sessions to encourage interactive learning. • Deliver workshops with a focus on communication for the Land and Environment Court. • Provide specific training for education committee members to help them design more educationally sound sessions.
34 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Continuing judicial education and training 35 Research and sentencing 3
P R O 3.2.2 Strategies G An important part of our mission is to promote a consistent • providing guidance on the sentences that other judicial R approach to sentencing and minimise the possibility of officers have given in similar circumstances by publishing A error in criminal trials. sentencing statistics and summaries of appeal decisions M on JIRS and in the monthly Judicial Officers’ Bulletin, S Our research and sentencing program is designed to facilitate which is sent to all judicial officers in NSW informed decision making without interfering with a judicial • researching and publishing information on sentencing officer’s independence and discretion. Our program’s trends and issues in print and online strategies include: • publishing changes to the criminal law on JIRS and in • providing sentencing information and explaining our legal reference books. criminal law developments through online and print platforms. Our bench books and original research The performance of our Research and Sentencing function studies are published in hardcopy and online through this year is detailed at 2.2 on p 19. the Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) and on our website. Bench books set out in logical order Our Director, Research and Sentencing is Hugh Donnelly. He the major legislation and precedents which apply when works with a small team of researchers and statisticians. conducting a criminal trial, procedural guidelines, He also convenes a committee of judges and a retired suggested jury directions and sample orders. Our judge for keeping the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book up- original research studies are edited in plain English. to-date. More details about the committee can be found in Statistical information is presented in easy-to-read Appendix 4 on p 114. charts and graphs The Director, Research and • providing detailed information on sentencing Sentencing, Hugh Donnelly, principles and practice in the Sentencing Bench Book is pictured with some of supplemented by up-to-date recent law news and his team, Pierrette Mizzi, easy-to-follow statistical information on JIRS Research and Sentencing Manager (left); and Georgia Brignell, Senior Research Officer (centre).
3.2 Research and sentencing
3.2.1 Highlights • Published a study of sentencing for common offences in the NSW Children’s Court 2010 (see p 39) • Published a study of the top 20 offences in the Local Court of NSW 2010 (see p 39) • Substantially rewrote several sections of the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book and revised over 40 jury directions (see p 39 ) • Improved the design of the Commonwealth Sentencing Database (see p 39) • Developed an iPad application and voice recognition function for magistrates to improve accessibility to JIRS (see p 40)
The NSW Children’s Court in Parramatta, pictured, has been the focus of a special research and sentencing study we published this year: see p 39.
36 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Research and sentencing 37 Research and sentencing 3
P R O The Judicial Information Research System To maintain the currency, accuracy, timeliness and 3.2.3 Research and sentencing high Communicated major criminal law G accessibility of JIRS, we continually monitor the law and The online Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) developments R enhance JIRS. lights and innovations 2011–12 is a database for judicial officers and legal practitioners. During the year, we kept judicial officers up-to-date with A It is central to how we communicate sentencing We check the currency of all legislation on JIRS each week Published a study of common offences in the major legal developments by: M information and changes to the criminal law. JIRS is the and on a daily basis monitor developments in case law, NSW Children’s Court • publishing summaries of important appellate S first of its kind in Australia and is a world leader in the legislation and government policy. These developments are The NSW Children’s Court is a special protective judgments on JIRS and in the Judicial Officers’ Bulletin, field of computerised legal databases. It is an extensive, analysed and added to our databases and publications. To jurisdiction with a strong emphasis on rehabilitation. This including major people smuggling cases interrelated sentencing resource that provides modules of ensure the integrity of our statistics, we audit all sentencing year we published a study* that comprehensively analysed • posting summaries of new criminal legislation and reference material. JIRS provides rapid and easy access to data that we receive from the Bureau of Crime Statistics both the offenders and offences which they committed. explaining its impact the courts’ sentencing decisions. and Research (BOCSAR). The monograph: • publishing an analysis of the High Court’s significant • sets out the 20 most common proven principal decision on standard non-parole periods in the Judicial offences for the Children’s Court for 2010 Officers’ Bulletin (see case study on p 41) • highlights the penalties imposed for those offences, • publishing regular updates to the Sentencing Bench Book and the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book. Figure 22 JIRS: the Judicial Information Research System: a complete judicial decision support system and • provides an overall profile of the juvenile offenders who A particular focus this year has been on the work of the were sentenced in 2010 and the kinds of offences they Local Court and the Children’s Court. Information that we Description What we do JIRS Component committed. summarised and posted on JIRS about these two courts Early notice of important — identify significant decisions and legislative changes Announcements and * Sentencing for common offences in the NSW Children’s concerned: legal developments — extract core of case law and legislation and post online Recent Law Court: 2010, Research Monograph No 36, published March • a judicial officer’s role in defended hearings — print and distribute monthly Recent Law flyer 2012 . • making licence disqualification orders Statistics on the range — receive data from NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research Sentencing statistics and frequency of penalties — audit data • costs orders imposed in similar cases — process and load data on JIRS within 1–4 months of receipt • bail hearings, and Published a study of common offences in the Full text of judgments and — receive cases from High Court, Court of Criminal Appeal (CCA), Court of Case law • forensic procedure orders. case summaries for selected Appeal, Supreme Court, Land and Environment Court, Industrial Relations NSW Local Court cases Commission, District Court and Local Court This study* analysed the top 20 offences that the Local — advance notes supplied by Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions — post judgments within 1 working day of receipt Court finalised in 2010 and compares these with findings — prepare Recent Law items within 14 days of receipt for important decisions reported in previous studies that we published in 2002 and — prepare important CCA case summaries within 2 weeks of receipt 2007. The study presents some general findings about “I thought [the] article on the — link cases and summaries to sentencing principles and practice component offender and case profiles and also analyses the most and the Criminal Trial Courts and Civil Trials Bench Books common statutory and regulatory offences that the Local diminished role of standard Court disposed of in 2010. See the case study on p 41. Concise commentary on — take sentencing principles from new cases and legislation and post as Sentencing principles sentencing principles Recent Law items and practice (Sentencing non-parole periods was — link principles in bench book to case law and legislation Bench Book) * Common offences in the NSW Local Court: 2010, Sentencing Trends & Issues No 40, published May 2012 Practice and procedure — identify significant decisions and legislative changes which impact on the Bench books manuals for the various courts content of the bench book excellent .” containing current statements — Bench book committees consider content and draft amendments and of relevant legal principles, special bulletins NSW Public Defender sample orders and suggested — publish updates on JIRS and in hard copy Revised over 40 jury directions in the Criminal jury directions Trial Courts Bench Book All NSW and Commonwealth — receive legislation from NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and Legislation A judge has an overriding responsibility to ensure that Acts and Regulations Commonwealth Attorney General’s Department the accused person in a criminal trial receives a fair trial. — process and load legislative changes within 24 hours of receipt Improved the design of the Commonwealth This requires the judge to explain to the jury which legal — alert users to commencement date of criminal legislation via Recent Law Sentencing Database items principles apply to the jury’s task of deciding the facts — link legislation to relevant case law and sentencing statistics in the case and ultimately the guilt or innocence of the In 2010, the High Court of Australia said* that numerical — verify currency of legislation weekly accused. The judge summarises for the jury the issues in tables or graphs, by themselves, are not particularly useful Monographs, Sentencing — identify relevant topic or research area Publications the case. It is important that judges use easily understood to a sentencing judge. The court said that sentencing Trends & Issues, Judicial — commission author and non-technical language when directing a jury. During statistics are useful if the sentencing judge is told the Officers’ Bulletin, The Judicial — edit and typeset manuscript Review the year, we revised and rewrote more than 40 jury reasons why a particular sentence was fixed. To ensure — publish in hard copy and online directions in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book. The that the Commonwealth Sentencing Database hosted on Essential information on — identify relevant service providers Services directory revision focused on drafting easily understood suggested JIRS remained a useful mechanism to inform the courts of treatment options and — maintain currency of information directions to help to ensure effective communication with sentencing patterns for particular Commonwealth offences, rehabilitation facilities the jury. we substantially redesigned the database. A judicial officer and other users can now access reasons behind the sentencing graphs that explain why the sentence was passed. To outline the changes, and how to use the sentencing database, Pierrette Mizzi, Manager of Research and Sentencing, presented a paper and demonstrated how to use the database at a major sentencing conference (see Appendix 15 on p 124 for details about the conference). The paper will be published in a forthcoming issue of The Judicial Review. * in Hili v Jones (2010) 242 CLR 520
38 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Research and sentencing 39 Research and sentencing 3
P R O Improved accessibility to JIRS 3.2.4 Case studies G With the provision of iPads to Local Court magistrates R (see p 31), our technology focus has been on ensuring A that JIRS is easily accessed on eBook readers and other Explaining an important sentencing law between a child and an adult’s thought processes and M tablet devices and on developing mobile applications. decision maturity. The judge also observed that if the complainant S During the year, we made 11 enhancements to the Judicial were being truthful, she might find it difficult to give her A non-parole period is the minimum time that a court Information Research System (JIRS) including: evidence because she would relive the assault. The jury orders a convicted offender to spend in prison. In 2002, • developing an application to improve access to JIRS found that the stepfather was guilty of two offences of the NSW Parliament passed a law which introduced a on iPads aggravated sexual assault. The accused appealed his standard non-parole period for specified offences. The new conviction. The Court of Criminal Appeal found for the • enhancing the recent law editing software to work on law defined a standard non-parole period as “the non- iPads accused and allowed the appeal. The court said that the parole period for an offence in the middle of the range of trial judge’s comments about the child witness were an • adding a voice recognition function objective seriousness”. In 2004, the NSW Court of Criminal error as they blurred the distinction between a comment • developing a “My JIRS Notes” component for Appeal handed down a decision known as Way’s case to and a direction. A judge should not suggest how the jury annotating components of JIRS help the courts to understand and apply the new scheme. approach its task to assess a child’s evidence in a manner Hundreds of offenders were subsequently sentenced • linking higher courts statistics to judgments that appears to be a direction of law. The comments according to the court’s reasoning in Way’s case. • enhancing higher court statistics deflected the jury from its task to assess the complainant’s • including tables of statutes and tables of contents for In late 2011, the High Court of Australia decided that reliability and credibility. bench books with links the 2004 decision in Way’s case which judges had To explain this important decision* and its impact on • automatically generating a monthly list of recent law subsequently followed was wrongly decided. The High how judges manage evidence in sexual assault trials, we items for publication Court said that the 2002 law required a sentencing judge published an announcement on JIRS and a summary to fully state their reasons for arriving at the sentence • linking the offence packages menu to the legislation of the decision in the Judicial Officers’ Bulletin. We then imposed. The High Court found that the NSW Court of • adding links to other components of JIRS from rewrote commentary and reviewed the jury directions in the Criminal Appeal erred in treating the standard non-parole repealed sections of legislation Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book. period as a mandatory starting point. The High Court said • improving access to Children’s and Local Court that fixing a non-parole period is only one part of the larger appeals to higher courts. * R v RGM [2012] NSWCCA 89 task of determining a sentence. In effect, the High Court’s decision has reduced the role of standard non-parole periods in the sentencing exercise. A court must only be “mindful” of it as an additional factor when sentencing Monitoring sentencing patterns in the Local an offender. The High Court also said that the objective Court seriousness of an offence does not include matters Systems Officer Vince Puglia is part of our busy Our statutory mandate is to assist the courts to achieve personal to the offender. IT team that has developed an application for consistency in sentencing. One way we do this is to judicial officers to access the Judicial Information analyse the sentencing data that the courts provide to To explain the High Court’s important decision* and Resesarch System (JIRS) on iPads and tablet PCs. us and report on discernible trends. In May 2012, we its impact on sentencing law, we published a timely published a study which looked at the top 20 offences that announcement and a summary of the decision on JIRS. We the Local Court heard in 2010 and compared our findings analysed the decision and drew attention to inconsistencies with studies that we undertook in 2002 and 2007. in its application in subsequent cases in a major article Challenges published in the Judicial Officers’ Bulletin. We also rewrote Our study found that although new offences have been • Rewriting over 40 suggested jury directions in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book. commentary in the Sentencing Bench Book. introduced and there have been changes in charging procedures and penalty options since 2007, the 20 most * Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120 • Maintaining the currency, accuracy, timeliness and accessibility of JIRS. common statutory offences and the overall sentencing • Responding to requests for information from government agencies (see below at 4. 3 on p 52). patterns in 2010 were similar to those observed in 2002 and 2007. The three most common offences in 2010 were Explaining how to use evidence in a sexual mid-range PCA, common assault and low-range PCA. The assault trial overall penalty distribution in 2010 also remained similar Looking ahead 2012–13 to that reported in 2002 and 2007. Fines continued to be Where a child is a witness in a trial, the jury’s role is to the most common penalty imposed, followed by good • publish regular updates to the Sentencing Bench Book and Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book assess the child’s credibility and the reliability of their behaviour bonds and dismissals and discharges without evidence. The trial judge can guide but not direct the jury • publish a study about sentencing for fraud offences conviction. The sentencing patterns reveal a high rate of how to approach the child’s evidence. Generally speaking, non-custodial sentences among the 20 most common • publish two Sentencing Trends & Issues papers the judge is not permitted to warn the jury that children are statutory offences. less credible or reliable than adult witnesses. • develop mobile applications to support judicial officers * Common offences in the NSW Local Court: 2010, A child complained that her stepfather had sexually • adapt JIRS for mobile devices Sentencing Trends & Issues No 40, published May 2012 assaulted her on two occasions. During the stepfather’s • provide greater support for iPad users trial, the judge commented generally about the difference • release a “my JIRS notes” component to annotate components of JIRS • improve navigation of JIRS with voice support.
40 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Research and sentencing 41 Examing complaints 3
P R O 3.3.2 Strategies How to make a complaint G A core task of the Judicial Commission is to deal with Anyone may make a complaint about the ability or R complaints about a judicial officer’s ability or behaviour. We behaviour of a judicial officer. A formal complaint must: A do this by: • be in writing M • examining complaints quickly, independently, • identify the judicial officer concerned, and the S objectively and effectively complainant • keeping the complainant and the judicial officer fully • be supported by a statutory declaration that verifies informed of the progress of the complaint the particulars of the complaint • providing information, publications and talks about our • be lodged with the Chief Executive of the Commission. role and function We will assist complainants with translation and • providing informal advice over the telephone and face- interpreting services if they need this. There is no fee and to-face legal representation is not required. • monitoring patterns in complaints and addressing recurring issues in our judicial education program.
There are about 330 judicial officers in NSW who handled more than 500,000 matters during 2011–12. The small number of complaints from year to year compared to the number of judicial officers and the high volume of litigation indicates the high standard of judicial ability and conduct in The Commission’s NSW and the community’s willingness to accept decisions if they are made in accordance with the due process of complaints function law. Members of the Judicial Commission are responsible for examining all complaints lodged. See p 60 for details is protective, not about the members. The performance of our complaints function this year is detailed at 2.3 on p 24. punitive . The Judicial Commission’s complaints function is protective. We have no power to discipline judicial officers, only to protect the public from judicial officers who are not fit for office or who lack the capacity to discharge their duties. Our function is also to protect the judiciary from unwarranted intrusions into their judicial independence. Our website provides information to help people 3.3 Examining complaints understand the types of complaints we deal with, possible outcomes, how to make a complaint, and a complaints How complaints affect the judicial education form for downloading. For those without internet access, program we provide a hardcopy plain English brochure Complaints against judicial officers and a complaints form. We monitor the basis of complaints to identify any gaps in judicial education, competence or ability. Information gathered from complaints is used to develop education 3.3.1 Highlights How we deal with complaints and enquiries sessions on topics such as providing a fair hearing and • Examined complaints quickly, independently, objectively and effectively avoiding bias, avoiding inappropriate comments and Examining the complaint (see p 43) discourtesy, domestic violence and sexual assault issues, Within one week, we acknowledge in writing any and cultural awareness training. complaint received. If the complaint relates to a court • Kept all complainants and the judicial officer concerned fully informed about the matter, we obtain sound recordings and a transcript of the For information about the types of patterns that have progress of their complaint (see p 43) proceeding. The Commission investigates the complaint emerged over the last five years, see p 27. in private to decide if it requires further action. In all cases, • Helped the Land and Environment Court design an online complaints form we advise the judicial officer that a complaint has been (see p 45) made and provide the judicial officer with the complaint documents. If the examination shows no wrong conduct, • Conducted case studies of complaints to help inform the judicial education the Commission dismisses the complaint under criteria set program (see p 47) out in section 20 of the Judicial Officers Act 1986 and we explain to the complainant in writing why the complaint was dismissed.
Part of Executive Assistant Cheryl Condon’s role is to provide members of the public with information about the Commission’s complaints process.
42 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Examining complaints 43 Examing complaints 3
P R O Anyone may make If the Parliamentary vote is in favour of removal, the G Governor then removes the judicial officer from office on R the ground of proven misbehaviour or incapacity. To date, A this has never occurred. a complaint about a M If a Conduct Division forms the opinion that a wholly S judicial officer’s ability or partly substantiated complaint does not justify Parliamentary consideration of the judicial officer’s removal or behaviour . from office, it must send a report to the relevant head of jurisdiction setting out its conclusions. The report may include recommendations about the steps that might be taken to deal with the complaint. A copy of the report is provided to the judicial officer and the Commission.
Complaints that require further action Our website provides easy to Formal complaints governance follow information about the If the complaint shows conduct which is lawful but not complaints process so that appropriate, the Commission may refer the complaint to The Commission’s formal complaints work is governed people can understand the the relevant head of jurisdiction and provide all supporting by the Judicial Officers Act 1986 and two documents, types of complaints we deal material. The Commission may recommend some action the Complaints against judicial officers: guidelines (see with, possible outcomes and to prevent the problem occurring again or that the judicial Appendix 1 on p 109) and the Conduct Division: guidelines how to make a complaint. officer be counselled. The complainant and the judicial for examination of complaints (see Appendix 2 on p 111). A complaints form can be officer complained about are advised of the action taken. Figure 23 on p 46 explains how the complaints process downloaded. For those works. without computer access, we will provide a brochure with Complaints referred to a Conduct Division the same information and a The Commission may also refer a complaint to be examined Informal enquiries complaints form. by a panel known as a Conduct Division. This is not a Informal enquiries are regularly made to the Commission During the year we helped the standing body but is specially convened for this purpose. from members of the public, the legal profession, the Land and Environment Court A Conduct Division has the same functions, protections media, and others. design an online complaints and immunities as a Royal Commission. In the Judicial form to assist the public Commission’s 25-year history, 16 Conduct Divisions have We are usually able to help people by providing information to make complaints about been formed. The Judicial Commission decides on the three or an explanation, referring them to another agency, or Land and Environment Court members of a Conduct Division — two are judicial officers advising them of the process for making a complaint to the commissioners. The Judicial Commission cannot deal with (one may be a retired judicial officer) and one a community Commission. Enquiries often relate to matters that should be these types of complaints as representative that the NSW Parliament nominates. dealt with on appeal to a higher court and, in these cases, Land and Environment Court we advise the person to seek independent legal advice. commissioners are not judicial A Conduct Division’s hearings may be held in public or officers. in private. The judicial officer being investigated has, in all cases to date, been provided with financial assistance for their legal representation before the Conduct Division. What we cannot deal with The Crown Solicitor and Senior and Junior Counsel are The complaints function is only concerned with instructed to assist a Conduct Division. investigating complaints about a judicial officer’s ability or behaviour. We do not have the power to: A Conduct Division’s work involves gathering evidence • examine allegations of criminal or corrupt conduct as about the complaint, holding hearings and deciding these are matters for the police or the Independent whether a complaint is partly or wholly substantiated. A Commission Against Corruption Conduct Division does not have the power to remove a judicial officer; the Governor of NSW, acting on the advice • review a case for judicial error, mistake or other legal of Parliament, bears this ultimate responsibility. The power grounds to remove a judicial officer is protective and not punitive. • discipline or sanction a judicial officer Challenge • examine complaints about retired judicial officers, If a Conduct Division forms an opinion that a complaint federal judicial officers, arbitrators, assessors, registrars, • Explaining to a disappointed complainant why their complaint was dismissed. could justify Parliamentary consideration of the judicial chamber registrars, members of tribunals or legal officer’s removal, the Division must present to the Governor representatives. of NSW a report setting out its findings of fact and its opinion. A copy of the report must be given to the judicial officer complained about, the Judicial Commission, the Looking ahead 2012–13 Attorney General and, after the Attorney General lays the • Review publicly available information about the complaints process to ensure it report before both Houses of Parliament, the complainant. is easy to understand and accessible. The judicial officer may be invited to address Parliament to show cause why Parliament should not request the • Use concerns raised by the public to inform judicial education sessions. Governor to remove the judicial officer from office. Parliament then considers and votes on whether the conduct justifies removal.
44 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Examining complaints 45 Examing complaints 3
P R O † Figure 23 How the complaints process works 3.3.3 Case studies G R A 1 Magistrate made inappropriate comments People who are not satisfied with the outcome of a case M often make a complaint to the Commission instead of lodging S The Commission receives The Commission Commission members Complaint an appeal. The Commission’s role is to examine complaints a written complaint acknowledges receipt of undertake a preliminary The complainant appeared before a magistrate charged accompanied by a statutory the complaint and notifies examination of the about ability or behaviour. It does not have authority to review with the offences of failing to leave a licensed premises declaration verifying the the judicial officer complaint judicial decisions, including findings of fact and law. That is a complaint particulars and behaving in an offensive manner. He complained that matter for courts of appeal and is recognised in the provisions the magistrate during the proceedings made offensive of section 20 of the Judicial Officers Act, which requires the comments about his nationality and was biased and Commission to dismiss complaints summarily where there is prejudiced. an avenue of appeal or review available. 2 Complaint summarily Complaint referred to appropriate Complaint referred to The Commission’s examination dismissed head of jurisdiction who may Conduct Division for counsel the judicial officer or make examination The Commission reviewed the sound recording of the Failure to give a fair hearing administrative arrangements within hearing and the judicial officer’s response to the complaint. Complaint his or her court to avoid recurrence The investigation confirmed that the judicial officer had of the problem. Complainant and A self-represented complainant alleged that the Supreme made a number of inappropriate comments concerning judicial officer notified. Court judge hearing his case had denied him procedural the complainant’s country of origin. The Commission fairness, abused his power, and made a wrong decision. determined that it should not dismiss the complaint and referred the matter to the Chief Magistrate to deal with. The Commission’s examination 3 The Commission reviewed the transcript of the hearing Complainant and Complaint wholly or partly Complaint wholly or partly and the judgment. The examination revealed that the judge judicial officer notified substantiated but does not substantiated and could Magistrate made inappropriate remark when of decision justify removal justify removal had been scrupulously fair and objective throughout the dismissing a charge proceedings and there was no evidence to support the Complaint allegations of misconduct. The complainant appeared before a magistrate charged Conduct Division reports Conduct Division reports The Commission found that the decisions made to relevant head of to Governor setting out with knowingly taking part in cultivating a prohibited plant. regarding the application before the court were within jurisdiction setting out its opinion that the matter At the end of the evidence, his legal representative made conclusions including could justify parliamentary the competence of a judicial officer and did not raise recommendations as to consideration of a submission that there was no case to answer on the questions of misconduct under the Judicial Officers Act. steps that might be taken removal evidence. The magistrate subsequently dismissed the to deal with the complaint The Commission also noted that there was an adequate charge on the basis that it could not be proved beyond right of appeal available to the complainant and in those reasonable doubt. The legal representative requested circumstances it was required to dismiss the complaint. a certificate under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act. In declining to grant a certificate the magistrate commented Copy of report provided The Attorney General lays that “on balance I think your client’s guilty”. The Complaint about a retired judicial officer to judicial officer and the the report before both Commission Houses of Parliament magistrate’s comment was raised as the complaint. Complaint The Commission’s examination The complainant alleged that a Supreme Court judge had “systematically and wilfully contrived findings” in a matter The Commission reviewed the sound recording of the which had been before the court several years ago. Complainant notified of Parliament considers hearing and confirmed that the comment had been decision whether the conduct justifies made. In his response to the Commission, the magistrate The Commission’s examination the removal of the judicial officer from office acknowledged that his remark was inappropriate for a The Commission made inquiries of the court and was judicial officer, and acknowledged that he was aware at the advised that the judge had retired and had not been time he had upset the complainant. He said he didn’t mean appointed an acting judge. to do that and apologised. The Commission determined 4 that the complaint should not be dismissed and referred it The Commission has no jurisdiction over retired judicial to the Chief Magistrate to deal with. The Commission also officers and was required by the Judicial Officers Act to Judicial officer Judicial officer removed dismiss the complaint as the person complained about not from office by Governor conveyed the magistrate’s apology to the complainant. removed on the ground of was no longer a judicial officer. While this outcome may be proven misbehaviour or disappointing for the complainant, the Commission has no incapacity. Substitution for appeal power to do more about allegations made against a retired judicial officer. Complaint The complainant, a solicitor representing a client in criminal proceedings, alleged that the magistrate had made a series † See Appendix 1 on p 109 for further details of the complaints process . of errors concerning evidence given during the hearing.
The Commission’s examination The Commission dismissed the complaint after reviewing the sound recording of the proceedings. The Commission was of the view that the complainant had an adequate right of appeal to the District Court against the magistrate’s decision.
46 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PROGRAMS — Examining complaints 47 We assisted the 4. PARTNERS Australia Indonesia Partnership for Justice.
Outcomes 2011–12
• 59% increase in distribution of free copies of our publications to community groups and universities (see p 51) • Provided substantial research assistance to government agencies (see p 52) • Presented at high-level international judicial reform forums in France, Turkey and Indonesia (see p 55) • Shared experience and expertise with Hong Kong and Indonesian judiciaries (see p 55) • Supported and maintained the Queensland Sentencing Information System and the Commonwealth Sentencing Database (see p 55) • Our Chief Executive elected to the Executive Committee of the International Organisation for Judicial Training (see p 57)
Contents 4.1 Partners’ satisfaction ...... 50 4.2 Informing the NSW public, universities and ...... 51 community groups 4.3 Working with other government agencies ...... 52 Pictured are law students at the Jentara Law School, 4.4 Engaging with other jurisdictions ...... 54 Jakarta, Indonesia in discussion with our Chief 4.5 Linking with other judicial education providers ...... 56 Executive and Director, Information Management, about our experience in providing computerised support for the judiciary. See the story on p 55.
48 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PARTNERS 49 4
O U R 4.1 Partners’ satisfaction Education providers appreciate our resources 4.2 Informing the NSW public, We added a new section to the website about our Aboriginal cultural awareness initiative, the Ngara Yura Program, to P As well as delivering a continuing judicial education universities and community groups provide information about the program’s activities and A program and examining complaints, we share our expertise To develop and maintain confidence in the courts and the reports about community visits and conferences. For and experience with our partners. We inform the public judicial system, we provided information, free publications information about the Ngara Yura Program, see p 34. R and community groups about our role, provide pro bono “I was watching the and talks about our role and judicial officers’ work. T and commercial assistance to national and international We distributed 225 free copies of our educational DVDs (last N judiciaries and justice sector agencies, and exchange Circle Sentencing DVD year: 166) and 135 free copies of our research monographs E information and ideas with other judicial education to law libraries, community organisations, teachers and R Educating with free resources providers. today with my legal students (last year: 60), a 59% increase. See Appendix 8 on S Following requests from members of the public, we made page 119 for details of our publicly available resources. studies class and it was our bench books available in PDF format for free download International partners appreciate our work from our website to personal computers and e-book readers. Bench books are loose leaf reference publications excellent .” Communicating with Indigenous “I am enormously grateful to you for your trip that set out legislation, case law, principles, procedural to Hong Kong, for the advice you gave, for Sydney High School teacher guidelines, suggested jury directions and sample orders. communities the demonstrations and for the significant Judicial officers principally use bench books to assist them Promoting cross-cultural communication between Aboriginal boost which your efforts have given to my to conduct trials but they also contain invaluable guidance communities and judicial officers is an important part of for the legal profession, government agencies, academics design to enhance modern judicial training our mission. During the year, we held a major conference and law students. Bench books are regularly updated in this jurisdiction” in Sydney to exchange ideas about the overrepresentation during the year to ensure their currency and accuracy. This of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system. We (The Honourable Mr Justice Stock, Vice-President, year, the website use of the bench books has experienced also organised a cultural visit to the inner city Aboriginal Lawyers acknowledge sentencing Court of Appeal, Hong Kong) a high 39% growth (last year: 17%). community at Redfern. For more information about the presentations Ngara Yura program, please see p 34. Our Director, Research and Sentencing, Hugh Donnelly, To our online library, we added the research and gave presentations about our conviction appeals research sentencing studies published during the year (see p 39 for to lawyers at the Public Defenders’ Chambers and the Legal details of these). The use of all our online resources has Legal agencies and the profession value our Providing information and advice Aid Commission. The lawyers gave very positive feedback grown an average of 51%, exceeding our target of 5%, as publications and were impressed with the depth of the research which shown at Figure 24. Details of our publishing program are Our Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM, responded analysed appeal success rates over the last decade. on p 31. to 19 media enquiries about our work (last year: 15) and we attended to 426 telephone, face-to-face and written enquiries from potential complainants (last year: 450). “Thank you for providing Chief Justice of Australia acknowledges our Figure 24 Website use of our resources assistance 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Change Target the Bench Books in the At an important regional conference held in Sydney in April hits per hits per hits per % % 2012,* the Chief Justice of Australia, the Honourable Justice month month month Robert French AC, spoke of how Australian assistance Civil Trials Bench Book 8,089 10,159 16,741 54.9 s 5 s new PDF format . A great to judiciaries and courts in the Asia Pacific region was an Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book 8,161 9,988 12,794 28.1 s 5 s Judicial officers visited the inner Sydney- important way to strengthen the rule of law and deepen city community of Redfern in March innovation that will be legal expertise and mutual understanding among regional Sentencing Bench Book 6,873 7,902 14,034 77.6 s 5 s 2012 to learn about the transformation judiciaries. The Chief Justice acknowledged the Judicial Local Court Bench Book 7,540 4,872 5,849 20.1 s 5 s of this once disadvantaged Aboriginal community. Pictures (l–-r) are Shane extensively used by the Commission’s work in providing administrative support to Sentencing Trends – 1,937 3,372 74.1 s 5 s the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum (APJRF). The High Phillips, Chief Executive of the Tribal Sexual Assault Handbook 1,454 1,516 1,948 28.5 s 5 s Court of Australia, the Federal Court, the Supreme Court of Warrior Association; Justice Virginia profession .” Research monographs – 365 539 47.8 s 5 s NSW and the Judicial Commission all assist the APJRF. See Bell of the High Court of Australia; Ernest Schmatt PSM; Justice Lucy the case study on p 56. Equality before the Law Bench Book 158 157 192 22.3 s 5 s Sydney lawyer McCallum, Supreme Court of NSW DVDs – 136 191 41.1 s 5 s * The Hon R French AC, “Cooperation and convergence — judiciaries and Superintendent Luke Freudenstein, Education monographs 567 1,210 113.4 s 5 s and the profession”, address to the Commonwealth Lawyers Redfern Local Area Commander. Association Regional Conference, 21 April 2012, Sydney .
Looking ahead 2012–13 • We will continue to invite feedback on our services and respond to any constructive suggestions.
50 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PARTNERS 51 4
O U R Developed a community awareness program unprecedented insight into the workings of the NSW Director, Hugh Donnelly, was invited to present a paper The development of the second phase of the Forum justice system. Once informed, it is hoped that the with Sarah Huggett, NSW Crown Prosecutor, at a national Administration System — the Intervention Plan Supervision An innovative program to be launched next year is the P community leaders will pass on what they have learned to symposium, Truth, Testimony, relevance: improving phase — was completed and implemented in October Community Awareness of the Judiciary Program. During their respective communities. We have now finalised an the quality of evidence in sexual assault cases that the 2011. During the year, we met with the Forum Sentencing A the year we began developing the program which is interactive program. Those attending will engage with the Australian Institute of Criminology, Australian Institute of Program team on an ongoing basis to monitor support R intended to raise community awareness about the role challenges and issues that a judicial officer deals with such Family Studies and Victoria Police jointly organised. The requirements and discuss future system enhancements. T and work of the courts and judicial officers. The program as making sentencing and bail decisions and dealing with paper explored reforms concerning the reception of expert N will provide key community leaders with a unique and self-represented litigants. evidence in child sexual assault cases. E R Advising on a national water regulation S sentencing database Maintaining the Forum Sentencing case Challenge During the year, the federal Department of Sustainability, • Developing the community awareness program and balancing this with our management system Environment, Water, Population and Communities requested core work. In November 2010 we rolled out a customised case that the Commission report on the feasibility, scope and management system to support the Forum Sentencing cost of a national water regulation sentencing database Program. Forum sentencing is now available at 13 Local (NWRSD). The NWRSD is proposed to inform judicial officers Courts in NSW and provides an opportunity for victim(s) of throughout all Australian jurisdictions and assist them to make Looking ahead 2012–13 crime to meet with the offender(s) and the forum facilitator consistent decisions when sentencing for water offences. Our to explore the crime’s impact on everyone concerned and comprehensive report considered the policy and operational • Launch the community awareness program about the courts and judicial develop an intervention plan for the offender. issues associated with the collection and dissemination of officers. information about prosecutions for water offences. • Redevelop our website to improve accessibility.
Challenge 4.3 Working with other government • Balancing research and information requests from other criminal justice agencies agencies with our core work. Throughout the year, the Commission partnered with • the NSW Sentencing Council to assist with their other criminal justice and government agencies to provide review of suspended sentences expertise, assistance and exchange information. • the Criminal Law Review Division of the Department of Looking ahead 2012–13 Attorney General and Justice • the Crown Solicitor’s office to advise on the possible • Continue to maintain the timeliness and accuracy of the Lawcodes database. Maintaining and enhancing Lawcodes application of a guideline judgment for sexual assault • Work with BOCSAR to improve sentencing data particularly with regard to database • the NSW Commission for Children and Young People recording pleas, coding modifiers and electronic lodgement of indictments. Every NSW justice sector agency uses our Lawcodes • the NSW Law Reform Commission to advise on their database. This allows agencies to electronically exchange reference on sentencing and on jury directions information using the database of unique codes for all NSW • the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and Commonwealth criminal offences dealt with in NSW. • the NSW Public Defenders Office General access to the database is provided on our website. • legal practitioners who we assist in certain exceptional circumstances. This year we: • coded and distributed all new and amended offences for the NSW jurisdiction within four days of their commencement Working with the Bureau of Crime Statistics and • responded to all enquiries from Lawcodes users within Research 24 hours The timeliness and quality of sentencing data that the • commenced preliminary work on the redevelopment Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) sends of Lawcodes so that it will be compatible with mobile to us from the courts’ system has improved this year. The devices. Commission provided regular assistance and feedback on Throughout the year, the Commission hosts official our audits to BOCSAR and has had regular discussions visitors and delegations with court staff about data processing. who are interested to learn Providing substantial research assistance to about our judicial education and training program, the agencies Judicial Information Research We answered 33 substantial research enquiries Presenting at a national symposium on sexual System, and our complaints (last year: 37) mainly from NSW criminal justice agencies offence evidence function. In February 2012, a delegation from the Sentencing including: Over the past decade, the federal and State Governments Commission of Korea visited • the Legal Aid Commission of NSW to assist in their in Australia have made important reforms to the way the Commission to discuss review of offenders sentenced under the standard evidence in sexual assault cases is used. Our Research our role in the justice system non-parole period regime of NSW.
52 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PARTNERS 53 4
O U R 4.3.1 Case studies Advancing judicial reform in the Region Sharing expertise with international judicial Our Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM, is a member of organisations P the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum (APJRF) Secretariat. Over the past decade, Australia has provided high-level A Assisting Legal Aid NSW Informing the profession about our work The APJRF has 49 member countries and is dedicated assistance to the Indonesian law and justice sector through R In February 2011 the High Court handed down a landmark Our Research and Sentencing Director, Hugh Donnelly, to advancing judicial reform in the Asia Pacific Region. the Australian Agency for International Development T decision called Muldrock v The Queen. This case found conducted sentencing sessions at the Indictable Appeals Unit He represented the APJRF and the Commission at a high (AusAID). AusAID has committed to funding a five-year N that the way the NSW courts had sentenced offenders of Legal Aid NSW and the Aboriginal Legal Service. These level roundtable meeting in Jakarta in January 2012 that program — the Australia Indonesia Partnership for Justice. E focussed on promoting integrity-based reforms of judicial convicted of a standard non-parole period offence since sessions discussed recent developments in sentencing law, As part of this partnership, our Chief Executive, Ernest R systems. See the case study on p 56. While in Jakarta, Schmatt PSM and Director, Information Management, 2003 was potentially wrong. To respond to this decision, explored sentencing hypotheticals and provided an explanation S Legal Aid NSW established a team to review cases to of how the Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) works. Mr Schmatt also met with members of the Indonesian Murali Sagi PSM, were invited by AusAID to visit Jakarta determine whether the Muldrock decision has affected the He also gave two presentations about the findings of our Judicial Commission and the Indonesian Supreme Court in May 2012. They shared the Commission’s experience sentence imposed. We provided Legal Aid with details of conviction appeals research*, published last year, at the Public to share information about the NSW Judicial Commission’s in judicial education, information technology and standard non-parole period cases involving their clients. Defenders’ Chambers. These sessions were well attended by complaints function. complaints handling in discussions and presentations to the legal profession. the Indonesian Judicial Commission, the Supreme Court of Indonesia, and the Indonesia Jentera School of Law. * Judicial Commission of NSW, Conviction Appeals in NSW, June 2011. Supporting Turkish judicial reform Our Chief Executive was invited to provide advice about The World Bank and the Turkish Ministry of Justice jointly judicial education programs and demonstrate the Judicial organised an International symposium in April 2012 to Information Research System (JIRS) to the Hong Kong 4.4 Engaging with other jurisdictions our expertise with developing countries. National and support the Turkish government’s judicial reform strategy. Judicial Studies Board and senior judicial officers in June international courts regularly seek our advice and assistance Ernest Schmatt PSM was invited to join with other 2012. See case study on p 56. During our 25 years of operations, we have developed to develop their own programs and systems and to assist in international experts to speak at the symposium with expertise in building and maintaining judicial support organising conferences. 500 participants attending. The symposium considered During the year, we hosted delegations from the National and case management systems. Our computerised how international best practice in judicial reform could be Judicial Council of Nigeria and from the Sentencing sentencing information and judicial education programs Our assistance to other jurisdictions is detailed in Appendix applied in Turkey. Commission of Korea. Our visitors were interested to learn are highly regarded. The Commission has a strong focus 10 on p 121. about our education and research program, the Judicial on capacity building in the Asia Pacific Region and sharing Information Research System and the complaints function. In total, we hosted 10 official visitors (last year: 20) and two Assisting at a regional forum on corruption delegations to our Sydney office (last year: four). Details of Corruption and financial crime present significant these visits can be found in Appendix 12 on page 122. challenges for the Asia Pacific region. Fraud is estimated to cost the Australian community $8.5 billion a year and this is a quarter of the cost of total crime to Australia. To address some of the significant consequences of financial Supporting courts’ case management systems crime, the London-based Commonwealth Secretariat, We continued to host, maintain and support the: together with the Asia Pacific Group on money laundering, • case management systems for the NSW Drug Court, organised a Pacific judges regional forum on corruption Compulsory Drug Treatment Correctional Centre and and other financial crimes in Sydney this year. Our the NSW Youth Drug and Alcohol Court President, the Honourable Chief Justice Bathurst, gave the keynote address to the forum. One of our members, the • Queensland Sentencing Information System for the Honourable Justice Blanch AM, Chief Judge of the District Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney General Court, and our Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM, both • Commonwealth Sentencing Database. presented papers and participated in discussions.
Challenge • Assisting other jurisdictions, particularly participating in overseas visits and missions, must be balanced with our core statutory responsibilities and services.
Looking ahead 2012–13 • Expand the Drug Court case management system to the proposed Sydney Drug Court. • Enhance the Drug Court system to enable data exchange with drug testing providers. The Chief Executive of the Commission, Ernest Schmatt PSM, was invited to Hong Kong in June 2012 to advise the Hong • Support Asia Pacific judiciaries with pro bono advice and assistance. Kong judiciary about our experience in running judicial education programs and computerised judicial support systems. Pictured on the steps of the Court of Final Appeal, Hong Kong, is Ernest Schmatt (centre) with (l–r) the Honourable Mr • Participate as an active member of the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum, the Justice Cheung, Chief Judge of the High Court; the Honourable Chief Justice Ma; the Honourable Mr Justice Stock, Vice International Organisation for Judicial Training and the Commonwealth Judicial President of the Court of Appeal; and Ms Emma Lau, Judicial Administrator. See case study on p 56. Education Institute.
54 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PARTNERS 55 4
O U R Case studies P A Providing advice to the Judicial Studies Board Integrity based judicial reform in the Asia R of Hong Kong Pacific region T The Chair of the Judicial Studies Board of Hong Kong In December 1948, the United Nations recognised in the N visited the Commission in January 2011 as part of an Universal Declaration on Human Rights that everyone E international study tour of judicial education bodies. faced with a criminal charge is entitled to a fair and public R Following the visit, the Chief Justice of Hong Kong invited hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. The S the Chief Executive of the Commission, Ernest Schmatt Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, adopted in 1985 PSM, to Hong Kong in June 2012. Over three days, Mr in India, identify six core judicial values to give effect to this Schmatt shared with judicial officers and members of fundamental right. These principles and how to effectively the Judicial Studies Board the Commission’s experience implement them were the focus of a high level round table in running judicial education programs and gave workshop held in Jakarta in January 2012. There were 132 presentations about the Commission’s judicial support participants including distinguished judges, academics and system, the Judicial Information Research System (JIRS). legal practitioners from around the globe. The Commission’s The visit was very well received with the Chief Justice of Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM, represented the Hong Kong describing JIRS as “the Rolls-Royce model” of Commission and the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum sentencing databases. at the workshop. The workshop identified best practice to advance regional cooperation and promote integrity-based reforms of judicial systems in the South East Asian region. The workshop settled a communiqué which will guide future developments.
We assist the National Judicial College of Australia to run the National Judicial Orientation Program, a five-day course for newly appointed judicial officers to assist them in their transition to judicial office. Pictured are participants and steering committee members including our Education Director (second from right, front row) Ruth Windeler. The program was held in Glenelg, South Australia in May 2012.
Case study
Strengthening ties between international Conference on Training of the Judiciary in Bordeaux, judicial training bodies France in November 2011 with 290 participants. Participants at the conference attended plenary sessions, The International Organisation for Judicial Training (IOJT) round table meetings and workshops to examine the was founded in 2002 to support the work of international legitimacy, effectiveness and solidarity of judicial training judicial education providers, including the NSW Judicial programs. The conference brought together judicial The Australia-Indonesia Partnership for Justice (AIPJ) builds on Australia’s traditon of success in law and justice support to Indonesia. Commission. Our Chief Executive, Mr Ernest Schmatt education experts from around the world and strengthened Pictured are participants in the program held at the Supreme Court in Indonesia in May 2012 including our Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM, was elected to the IOJT’s Board of Governors in PSM (sixth from right), and Director, Information Management, Murali Sagi PSM (fifth from right) and Nicola Colbran (centre), Director, AIPJ. the shared knowledge base and connections between the 2009 and to the Executive Committee in 2011. The IOJT member organisations. now has 106 member organisations from 60 countries 4.5 Linking with other judicial • meetings of the Australia and New Zealand Judicial around the world. The IOJT held its Fifth International Educators’ Group (ANZJE). The Group met to share education providers information and experiences about benchmarking and In our 25 years of operation, we have built strong links standards, Aboriginal cultural awareness programs, with Australian and international judicial education bodies. planning for training programs, and to review the existing judgment writing program with a view to Sharing knowledge and experience and assisting these updating this and replenishing the base of trainers organisations with advice and planning is part of our mission. • working with the National Judicial College of Australia Challenge on the online judicial education clearing house which • Coordinating efforts among the different judicial education providers when most we are participating in During the year, we participated in a number of forums, are working with limited and sometimes shrinking resources. committees, conferences and steering groups in • meetings with the National Judicial College of Australia connection with our judicial education role. Appendix 11 on to discuss how we can work more closely with the p 121 has full details of these. These included: College and the courts to further the value of judicial education activities • the Continuing Legal Education Association of Looking ahead 2012–13 Australasia (CLEAA) Conference in Hobart • two National Judicial Orientation Programs organised jointly with the National Judicial College of Australia and • Continue to exchange ideas with our Australasian judicial education colleagues • the Fifth International Conference on Training of the the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration to reinforce the principles of sound judicial education. Judiciary organised by the International Organisation for Judicial Training in Bordeaux, France. See case • working with the National Judicial College and the • Participate as a member of the International Organisation for Judicial Training study below Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to enhance the Commonwealth Sentencing Database. and the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute.
56 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PARTNERS 57 We met our target 5. PEOPLE to provide staff, including Aidan and Fleur, with 2 days of professional training Outcomes 2011–12 during the year. • Staff satisfaction higher than last year (see p 66) • Maintained low staff turnover rate of 3% (see p 66) • Participation in professional development and training has increased (see p 67)
Targets 2012–13
• Maintain high staff satisfaction • Increase staff participation in professional development and training
Our yearly staff survey showed that 96% of our people enjoy working at the Commission.
Contents 5.1 Members of the Judicial Commission ...... 60 5.2 Our executive management team ...... 64 5.3 Our staff ...... 66
58 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 OUR PEOPLE 59 5
O U R
The Honourable Justice James Allsop P E Official member O Commenced 2 June 2008 P President of the Court of Appeal of NSW L E Justice Allsop was admitted to the NSW Bar in 1981. He was appointed Senior Counsel in NSW in 1994, Queen’s Counsel in Western Australia in 1998, a judge of the Federal Court of Australia in 2001, an additional judge of the ACT Supreme Court in 2003 and President of the NSW Court of Appeal in 2008.
As an official member of the Commission, Justice Allsop’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
The Honourable Justice Roger Boland
Official member The Judicial Commission meets monthly to conduct the preliminary examination of complaints, approve budgets, publications and education sessions, and review the Commission’s operations. The Commenced 9 April 2008 Commission is made up of six judicial members and four community members that the Governor of President of the Industrial Relations Commission NSW appoints. Justice Boland was admitted to the Bar in 1983, appointed a judge of the Industrial Court of NSW, Deputy President of the Industrial Relations 5.1 Members of the Judicial Commission Commission in 2000, and President of the Industrial Relations Commission in 2008. He served as Executive Director for the Australian Industry Group, The Commission has six official members and four appointed members. The heads of the State’s five courts as well as National Industrial Advocate for the Metal Trades Industry Association and the President of the Court of Appeal are the official members. The Chief Justice of NSW is the Judicial Commission’s has served on the NSW Parliamentary Remuneration Tribunal. President. The Governor of NSW appoints three people who, in the Attorney General’s opinion, have high standing in the community. The fourth is a legal practitioner appointed following consultations between the Attorney General and the As an official member of the Commission, Justice Boland’s Presidents of the Law Society and Bar Association. responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
The Honourable Justice Brian Preston The Honourable Tom Bathurst Official member President Commenced 14 November 2005 Commenced 1 June 2011 Chief Judge of the Land and Environment Court Chief Justice of NSW Justice Preston was admitted to the Bar in 1987, appointed Senior The Chief Justice was admitted as a solicitor in NSW in 1972 and Counsel in 1999 and Chief Judge of the Land and Environment Court admitted to the NSW Bar in 1977. He was appointed Queen’s in 2005. He has lectured in post-graduate law for over 20 years at both Counsel in 1987 and Chief Justice of NSW in 2011. He was the University of Sydney and the Australian National University and is President of the Australian Bar Association 2008–09 and President currently an Adjunct Professor of the Faculty of Law at the University of the NSW Bar Association 2010–11. The Chief Justice was also of Sydney. He holds editorial positions and has authored over 72 a Member of the Commonwealth Takeovers Panel, 2008–11. publications on environmental, administrative and criminal law. He has also been involved in a number of international environmental law As President, the Chief Justice is responsible for presiding at consultancies and capacity-building programs for the judiciaries in meetings and has a deliberative vote. Indonesia, Kenya, China, Trinidad and Tobago, Thailand and Sri Lanka. He is a member of numerous legal professional committees and Chair of the Standing Committee on Environmental Law of the Law Association for Asia and the Pacific (LAWASIA).
As an official member of the Commission, Justice Preston’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
60 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PEOPLE 61 5
O U R The Honourable Justice Reginald Blanch AM Dr John Griffiths SC P Official member Appointed member E Commenced 13 December 1994 Appointed 1 July 2009 for three years; resigned 18 April 2012 O Chief Judge of the District Court Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Laws, Master of Arts, Master of Laws, PhD in P administrative law L Justice Blanch was admitted to the Bar in 1972 and appointed Queen’s Counsel E in 1981. He served as a Public Defender, as the State’s Crown Advocate and the Dr Griffiths was admitted a barrister in 1994 and appointed Senior Counsel State’s first Director of Public Prosecutions. He was appointed a judge of the in 2001. Dr Griffiths served as Chair of the NSW Bar Association’s Human Supreme Court in February 1994 and Chief Judge of the District Court in 1994. Rights Committee. He was a Director of the Federal Administrative Review Justice Blanch has held several Board positions including Chairman of the NSW Council providing independent administrative law advice to the federal Attorney Medical Tribunal and Chairman of the Board of New College at the University of General. He was a Fellow and Director of Studies in Law at Emmanuel College, NSW. Cambridge University. He has published numerous articles and papers on administrative and constitutional law issues and is a leading administrative law As an official member of the Commission, Justice Blanch’s responsibilities are advocate. Dr Griffiths resigned from the Commission on 18 April 2012 following outlined on p 72. his appointment as a judge of the Federal Court.
As an appointed member, Dr Griffiths responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
His Honour Judge Graeme Henson Ms Renata Kaldor AO Official member Commenced 28 August 2006 Appointed member Chief Magistrate of the Local Court of NSW Appointed 19 August 2009 for three years Bachelor of Arts, Diploma of Education Judge Henson was admitted to the Bar in 1980 and served as Deputy Solicitor for Public Prosecutions in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Ms Kaldor is currently a Director of Australian Stationery Industries Pty Ltd. (NSW). He was appointed a magistrate in 1988, Deputy Chief Magistrate in She has extensive community involvement through Board and committee 1994, Chief Magistrate of the Local Court in 2006, and a judge of the District memberships including Chair of the NSW Women’s Advisory Council and the Court in 2010. His Honour is a member of the following bodies: Executive Board of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. She is an Honorary Fellow of the Council of the Judicial Conference of Australia; the Advisory Committee, Faculty Senate of the University of Sydney. Ms Kaldor was the Deputy Chancellor of the of Law, Australian Catholic University; the Advisory Board of the Faculty of Law University of Sydney 2000–2003 and a Fellow of the Senate 1989–2003. She at the University of Wollongong; and the Uniting Care Northern Sydney Regional is currently a member of the Board of Sydney Children’s Hospital Network, a Aged Care Board. Trustee of the Sydney Opera House Trust and a member to the Advisory Council for Alzheimer’s Australia NSW. As an official member of the Commission, Judge Henson’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72 As an appointed member, Ms Kaldor’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
Dr Judith Cashmore AO Professor Brian McCaughan AM
Appointed member Appointed member Appointed 1 December 2004; reappointed for three years from 19 August 2009 Appointed 16 May 2010 for three years. Bachelor of Arts (Hons), Diploma of Education, Masters in Education, PhD in Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery, Fellow of the Royal Australasian developmental psychology College of Surgeons
Dr Cashmore is currently Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Professor McCaughan is a cardiothoracic surgeon based at the Royal Prince Sydney and Adjunct Professor at Southern Cross University (Division of Arts). Alfred Hospital, Sydney and Clinical Associate Professor in the Faculty of She became an Officer of the Order of Australia in June 2010. Dr Cashmore has Medicine at the University of Sydney. Professor McCaughan has served as Chair chaired or served on numerous non-government and State and Commonwealth of the NSW State Royal Australian College of Surgeons Committee and President government committees concerning child sexual assault, child protection, child of the NSW Medical Board and Chair of the Sustainable Access Health Priority deaths, children’s rights and family law. As a research academic, she has a Taskforce. He has served as a Director of Surgical Services at the Royal Prince keen interest in the application of research to policy and practice, particularly in Alfred Hospital, Sydney and Area Director of Cardiovascular Services, Central relation to children’s involvement in legal proceedings. Sydney Area Health Service. He was recently appointed Chair of Boards of the Clinical Excellence Commission and the Agency for Clinical Innovation. As an appointed member, Dr Cashmore’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72. As an appointed member, Professor McCaughan’s responsibilities are outlined on p 72.
62 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PEOPLE 63 5
O U R 5.2 Our executive management team P E Ernest Schmatt PSM Ruth Windeler O P Chief Executive Education Director L Dip Law (BAB) BSc E Mr Schmatt commenced as Chief Executive on 17 April 1989. Prior to Ms Windeler commenced as Education Director on 15 May 1996. She has over 35 his appointment, he was the first Deputy Chief Executive of the Judicial years’ experience in professional education and has held positions in a number of Commission, appointed in 1987. He previously held senior legal and Commonwealth countries. She has served as Director of the Canadian Advocates’ management positions in the public sector. He was admitted to the Bar in Society Institute; Co-ordinator and Instructional Design Administrator for the 1979 and is a solicitor of the Supreme Court of NSW and the High Court of Institute of Professional Legal Studies in New Zealand; Director of Standards Australia. Mr Schmatt was awarded the Public Service Medal in the 1997 and Development for the Law Society of Hong Kong; Secretary to the Advocacy Queen’s Birthday Honours List for service to public sector management Institute of Hong Kong; Head of the Department of Continuing Medical Education and reform, public sector industrial relations and judicial education in and Re-certification for the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, and a NSW. He was elected to the Board of Governors of the International consultant to a number of professional education institutions throughout the world. Organisation for Judicial Training (IOJT) in 2009 and to the Executive Committee of the IOJT in 2011. Since 1994 he has been a member of the Mr Windeler is responsible for our judicial education program, including Advisory Board of the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute and conferences, seminars and publications. serves on the management committee of the Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum. Mr Schmatt is also an Honorary Associate in the Graduate School of Government, the University of Sydney. Hugh Donnelly Mr Schmatt is responsible for our operations. Director, Research and Sentencing BA, LLB, LLM The Chief Executive of the Commission, Ernest Schmatt PSM, is responsible for all of the Commission’s operations. A team of Mr Donnelly commenced as Director, Research and Sentencing on 13 July 2007. three directors assists him. Hugh Donnelly (second left) directs He was admitted as a legal practitioner in 1992 and his prior experience includes the research and sentencing program; Ruth Windeler directs the six years as Principal Research Lawyer and three years as High Court Lawyer at judicial education program and Murali Sagi PSM is responsible for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW). He served for three years information management and corporate services. as Manager of the Commission’s Research and Sentencing Division, commencing in 2004. He is the author of several publications on evidence and sentencing law, including the highly regarded Sentencing Bench Book.
Mr Donnelly is responsible for our research program and for the Judicial Information Research System.
Murali Sagi PSM
Director, Information Management and Corporate Services BEng, MBA, GradCertPSM, FACS, M Inst Eng
Mr Sagi commenced as Director, Information Management and Corporate Services on 1 July 2007. He joined the Commission in 1992 and was appointed Director, Information Systems in 2000. He has over 25 years’ experience in managing complex IT projects and has provided technical expertise to AusAID, UNDP, Asian Development Bank and the Commonwealth Secretariat for capacity building projects in Indonesia, Cambodia, India and Sri Lanka. Mr Sagi was awarded the Public Service Medal in the 2007 Queen’s Birthday Honours List for outstanding service to the Judicial Commission, particularly in the provision of information technology.
Mr Sagi is responsible for information management, corporate services and the Lawcodes project.
64 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PEOPLE 65 5
O U R 5.3 Our staff Consultants Inducting new staff Our staff are essential to the Judicial Commission’s we require retired judicial officers sometimes to help us in This year we engaged no consultants. The Commission’s Chief Executive and relevant Director P success and to ensuring we meet our goals and deliver our specialised tasks such as developing new bench books welcome all new employees to the Commission. E services. and examining complaints. O Managers guide new staff through an induction process so P Setting wages and conditions that they are aware of and acknowledge: This year, the Commission employed 40 people (34 full-time Serving judicial officers also assist in our work by L equivalent) in judicial education, legal research, information generously giving their time to serve on our various We are an employer under the Judicial Officers Act 1986. • the Commission’s role and profile E technology and administrative roles (last year: 38): Figure committees. Appendix 4 on p 114 provides details of all Conditions of employment mirror those of the NSW Public 22 shows the average number of employees in these roles our committees. Service and there were no changes to these conditions this • office facilities and occupational health and safety over a five-year period. Our small staff numbers mean that year. Public Service members who accept a position with information and procedures us retain their superannuation rights and benefits. • key policies and procedures that ensure acceptable behaviour Figure 25 Five-year comparison of average number of employees by employment category Staff were awarded a 2.5% salary increase from 1 July • conditions of employment and entitlements 2011 which reflected the increase provided to public sector employees under the Crown Employees (Public Sector — • our Code of Conduct. 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Salaries — 2008) Award. Senior executives were awarded Senior Executive 4 4 4 4 4 a 2.5% increase from 1 October 2011. Sentencing/judicial education 31 31 30 31 32 Providing professional training and We contribute 9% of each employee’s salary to First State development Administration/management support 4 4 4 3 4 Super or a superannuation fund of choice. Employees Employees identify their training and development needs in Total 39 39 38 38 40* have the option to contribute from their salary and to salary relation to their current job and career plan as part of their *34 full-time equivalent sacrifice contributions to their fund. yearly performance review. Managers encourage staff to take up training opportunities through skills development courses, leadership courses, tertiary study assistance and Providing flexible work arrangements work secondments. Our target is for employees to spend Staff satisfaction cent of staff strongly agreed or agreed that they receive at least two days each year on training and development. constructive feedback about their individual performance To help our employees perform optimally and balance work Our annual staff survey measures how committed, (last year: 85%) with only one staff member disagreeing. with family and personal obligations, we have adopted a stimulated and supported our people are. This year, we This year, staff participated in an average of two days of “flexible working practices agreement”. All requests for received a 68% response rate to the survey. formal training and development (last year: 1.85 days), flexible working arrangements are assessed on their merits meeting our target (see Figure 27). in line with this policy. Our “flexible working hours” policy Overall employee satisfaction has improved this year Retaining our staff with the majority of people (96%) positive about the provides staff with options to arrange their working hours. Our Forty staff members (100%) attended 80 training days The turnover rate for permanent staff decreased this year Commission (last year: 84%). Sixty per cent of people staff survey showed that 84% of employees agreed that the at a cost of $28,002 (last year: 70.5 training days). Staff to 3% (last year: 10%). This returned us to the low rate of strongly agreed and 36% agreed that they enjoyed working organisation provides them with a good work/life balance. attended a variety of training opportunities including: two years ago and is well below our acceptable turnover at the Commission with no staff members expressing • conferences and seminars to further professional rate of 15%, suggesting that we are an employer of choice Our working arrangements are published on the staff dissatisfaction (4% expressed no opinion). development in areas such as sentencing law, for the majority of our people: see Figure 26. intranet and are in line with the NSW Department of continuing legal education and current legal issues Our people feel highly valued, with 100% strongly agreeing Premier and Cabinet’s flexible work practices policy. Our long service rate is very high with just over half our • systems and IT workshops (web directions and or agreeing that their work directly contributes to our network administration) staff having 10 or more years’ service (51%) and 7% of achievements and success. The majority of staff (80%) feel staff having five or more years’ service. • in-house training for Microsoft Office 10 accountable for the quality of their work and 80% consider Communicating with our employees they are using their skills and knowledge in their current role. • fire warden training and first aid training. Regular round table meetings are held throughout the Figure 26 Staff turnover 2007–12 Commission staff have access to the Judicial Information Most staff (92%) consider that their working environment year and are an opportunity for staff to learn about work- Research System (JIRS) (see p 38) to keep up to date with is safe, discrimination-free and comfortable. Eighty-four 15 related activities and developments. All staff are invited Acceptable turnover limit legal developments. Our employees also attended many per cent of staff consider they achieve a work/life balance and one member of staff is encouraged to give a special of the educational activities provided for judicial officers, with our flexible work practices (see p 67). Most staff presentation about business developments or special 10 including in-house seminars on legal developments and (96%) believe that they have the resources to manage projects at each meeting. Reports of the meetings are published on our intranet. visits to Aboriginal communities as part of our Ngara Yura their workload and enhance productivity. Satisfaction with program (see p 34). training opportunities continues to improve with 84% of Per cent 5 Our employees are informed about policies and procedures staff strongly agreeing or agreeing that they are provided via our intranet and noticeboards. This year, our policies with adequate training (last year: 79%). Figure 27 Staff training 2009–12 0 were reviewed and updated as required. Directors have Target 80 days Last year we identified effective teamwork and cooperation 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 an open door policy and publish monthly reports about (2 days for each employee) as an area to build on. We are pleased to report that the Year their department’s progress. Departmental managers have survey has shown improvement over the year with 76% regular meetings with employees to discuss workflow and 2011–12 of staff feeling positive about our organisation’s teamwork work-related issues. and cooperation. Only two staff members or 8% were Satisfactory staff attendance 2010–11 dissatisfied (last year: 14% were dissatisfied). During 2011–12: 2009–10 The survey has shown that we need to focus on • no industrial action occurred developing more effective communication strategies with • average sick leave was six days (last year: six days). 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 16% expressing dissatisfaction with how information and (Note this does not include an extended period of sick knowledge are shared in the organisation (last year: 8%) leave that one staff member took following a non-work Number of courses attended Training days and 32% of staff expressing no opinion. Eighty-four per related accident.)
66 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PEOPLE 67 5
O U R Offering internships and work experience to Figure 28 Five-year trends in the representation of EEO groups1 Australian and international students P We are committed to mentoring postgraduate and % of total staff 2 E undergraduate law students and providing training EEO Group 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Benchmark/ O opportunities for them. This year we employed three trainees, target P two in Research and Sentencing and one in Education. Women 73 61 58 66 65 50 L During the year, we hosted two international postgraduate Aboriginal or TSI3 2 2 0 0 0 2.6 E students. Meissy Sabardiah, an Indonesian masters student, English not 1st 16 17 18 23 20 19 and German articled clerk Kourosh Gurtler who completed a language three-month internship in late 2011. Disability4 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 People with a disability 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 (2011) requiring work-related 1.3 (2012) Recognising employees’ achievements adjustment5 1.5 (2013) Ms Cheryl Condon, Executive Assistant to the Chief Executive, was awarded the NSW Meritorious Service 1 . These percentages reflect staff numbers as at 30 June 2012 . 2 . Excludes casual staff . Medallion in June 2012. Cheryl’s immense corporate 3 . The Commission has one Aboriginal identified person employed on a casual basis . knowledge gained over almost 25 years has greatly 4 . Per cent employment levels are reported but a benchmark level has not been set . benefitted the Commission in its work. 5 . Minimum annual incremental target .
For the second year in a row, Commission staff attended the Note: The Distribution Index is not calculated when EEO group or non-EEO group numbers Australasian Reporting Awards held in June 2012 to accept a are less than 20 . As a result, we are unable to publish the details of trends in the distribution of gold award for our 2010–11 Annual Report. salary levels of EEO group members .
Meissy Sabardiah, an Indonesian masters student, completed an Providing for equal employment opportunity internship at the Commission in September 2011. Meissy was supported by the Australian Leadership Award Program, funded by We are committed to providing a diverse, fair and safe AusAID. Meissy is pictured with the Commission’s Chief Executive, workplace for our people. Our corporate planning for equal Ernest Schmatt PSM. opportunity is aligned with the NSW Government’s Public Sector Workforce Strategy 2008–12. Almost two-thirds of our people are women (65%) and 20% are from culturally diverse 65% of the Commission’s backgrounds (see Figure 28). We ensure: • a workplace culture that has fair practices and staff are women and 20% behaviours are from culturally diverse • a workplace free from discrimination, harassment and disadvantage. We publish policies about these on our backgrounds. Virginia intranet and there were no complaints of discrimination or harassment this year (last year: none) works as a conference • opportunities for staff to act in higher positions support officer in our • flexible work arrangements for staff with family and personal obligations Education Division. • information is available about the NSW Government’s Spokeswoman’s Program, and the Government’s employment and development strategy “Making the public sector work better for women”.
We are currently working on an EEO Management Plan to identify and remove any systemic barriers that prevent EEO groups participating and being promoted in employment.
Challenge • Maintaining high staff satisfaction. • Develop more effective communication strategies.
Looking ahead 2012–13 The NSW Meritorious Service Medallion was awarded to Cheryl Condon in June 2012. Cheryl has been with the Commission since • Continue to develop our EEO Management Plan. its foundation in 1987 and has been Executive Assistant to two Chief Executives. Cheryl is pictured with the Premier of NSW, the • Encourage staff to take up training opportunities to meet our two-day target. Honourable Barry O’Farrell MP.
68 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PEOPLE 69 6. PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES It may seem insignificant,
Outcomes 2011–12 but every time • 11 Commission meetings and four Audit and Risk management committee meetings held (see p 73–74) Ros and other • Settled and accepted the Internal Audit Plan 2011–12 (see p 74) staff turn off • Ensure a safe working environment (see p 78) a light helps • 5% reduction in energy use (see p 80) our energy Targets 2012–13
• Update the Commission’s risk register efficiency and • Regularly brief staff on energy use and ways to reduce waste promotes • Train staff in our records management policy sustainabilty.
Contents 6.1 Our governance practices ...... 72 6.2 Our policies ...... 75 6.3 Our processes and technology ...... 78 6.4 Sustainability ...... 80
70 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 71 6
P R A 6.1 Our governance practices 6.1.3 Commission functions 6.1.5 Role of Chief Executive In 2011–12, Commission members: C • examined 90 complaints made about judicial officers Our governance practices ensure that: The Chief Executive is responsible for all of the T The Commission may delegate any of its functions to a (see p 25) • we fulfil our statutory functions effectively and Commission member, officer or committee. The Commission Commission’s operations and for the preparation of the I • referred seven complaints to the relevant head of efficiently has delegated duties to the Chief Executive, including financial report in accordance with Australian Accounting C Standards and the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983. jurisdiction for their attention (see p 26) • we are accountable for our actions its function as an employer and its access to information E obligations. The Commission has established committees to This includes establishing and maintaining internal controls • referred four complaints to a Conduct Division S • risk management and auditing processes are properly (see p 26) assist carrying out designated responsibilities. Appendix 4 on relevant to the preparation of the financial report. understood and managed, and p 114 has details about these committees. The Commission • approved publications, including The Judicial Review P • our leadership helps us to realise our vision, carry out seeks independent professional advice when necessary to (two issues), and Research Monograph 36 Sentencing our mission, hold to our values and achieve our goals. O perform certain functions. for Common Offences in the NSW Children’s Court: Appointment of Chief Executive 2010 (see p 39) L The Chief Executive is appointed on a five-year contract under • approved a feasibility study for a national water I 6.1.1 Responsibilities of official and section 6(1) of the Judicial Officers Act. Commission members regulation sentencing database (see p 53). C appointed Commission 6.1.4 Remuneration arrangements review the Chief Executive’s performance each year. I E members For the members 6.1.7 Relationship with the NSW S The Commission members set strategic directions for the Appointed members receive a fee for fulfilling their responsibilities including attending meetings, examining 6.1.6 Commission meetings Government Commission, appoint the executive management, approve A complaints, setting strategic directions, and approving Eleven Commission meetings were held during the year budgets and publications, present judicial education The Commission is an independent statutory corporation N sessions and conduct the preliminary examination of budgets and publications. Their annual rate of (last year: nine) and no special meetings were held (last established by the Judicial Officers Act. We are funded by D all complaints. The official members provide valuable remuneration is $27,500 and this is determined by the year: two special meetings to discuss matters arising the NSW Parliament and are required to report annually information about judicial officers’ education needs and NSW Statutory and Other Offices Remuneration Tribunal in from a Conduct Division inquiry). Figure 31 gives details to Parliament. The Commission may give advice to the bring their significant experience of the judicial role to accordance with section 50 of the Judicial Officers Act. No of each member’s attendance. Members are required to Attorney General on appropriate matters and the Attorney P determining complaints. The appointed members provide fees are paid to official members. attend each meeting, unless leave of absence is granted. General may refer a complaint about a judicial officer to the R useful information about community expectations of The quorum for a meeting is seven members, and at least Commission. O judicial officers and have input into the education program. one must be an appointed member. The Chief Executive C For senior management attends all meetings to report on the Commission’s E Members are informed about operational issues by: operations. Meeting papers are circulated one week before Senior executive remuneration is determined by the S • the Chief Executive’s monthly report covering the meeting to allow sufficient time for members to review 6.1.8 Legislative charter Judicial Commission in accordance with section 6 of S functional and financial matters agenda items and seek further information. We operate under the Judicial Officers Act and the Judicial the Judicial Officers Act 1986 and is equivalent to the E Officers Regulation 2006. Our principal functions under the • briefings on issues as they arise Chief and Senior Executive Service (CES/SES) in the S Judicial Officers Act are to: • contact with senior executives as required. NSW Public Service. Figure 29 shows the number of Figure 31 Commission members’ meeting attendance executive positions at the Commission and their equivalent • organise and supervise an appropriate scheme for the continuing education and training of judicial officers remuneration levels to the CES/SES. Meetings Meetings 6.1.2 Conflicts of interest attended eligible • assist the courts to achieve consistency in imposing sentences Figure 29 Executive positions to attend Official Commission members are judicial officers and this Official members • examine complaints against judicial officers. could result in a conflict of interest if a member were the 2009–10 2010–11 subject of a complaint. Commission policy is that a judicial Hon T Bathurst 11 11 Level* Total Female Total Female We also: member will not participate in any discussion or decision 6 1 0 1 0 Hon Justice Allsop 5 11 • give advice to the Attorney General on such matters as involving a complaint against him or her. No member 3 1 0 1 0 Hon Justice Boland 9* 11 the Commission thinks appropriate will participate in any discussion or decision where that 2 2 1 2 1 • liaise with persons and organisations in connection member has a possible conflict of interest. Hon Justice Preston 11 11 Total 4 1 4 1 with the performance of its functions Hon Justice Blanch AM 9** 11 * Equivalent to CES and SES levels in the NSW Public Service • enter into and carry out contractual arrangements for Figure 30 Our structure His Honour Judge Henson 9*** 11 the supply of services that make use of information Appointed members technology, expertise, or other things that the Commission has developed in the exercise of its Dr J Cashmore AO 8 11 functions. Dr J Griffiths SC 6 9 Ms R Kaldor AO 9 11 Prof B McCaughan AM 10 11
* plus 2 meetings attended by an alternate member ** plus 1 meeting attended by an acting head of jurisdiction *** plus 2 meetings attended by an acting head of jurisdiction
About our structure (figure shown opposite) The Commission’s organisational structure is depicted in Figure 30. Our governance body is the Judicial Commission, made up of six judicial and four appointed members. The Chief Executive is responsible for all of the Commission’s operations and for receiving complaints. The Audit and Risk Management Committee assists the Chief Executive to manage and control our risk exposure. Three Directors assist the Chief Executive to fulfil the Commission’s statutory functions (explained on p 1) and are responsible for the three business units: Education, Research and Sentencing, and Information Management and Corporate Services.
72 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 73 6
P R A Changes to legislation Figure 32 Meeting attendance by Audit and Risk C The Judicial Officers Amendment Act 2012 amended the Management Committee T Judicial Officers Act. The amendment commenced on 21 II Meetings Meetings eligible June 2012 and inserted a new section 37A into the Judicial C Officers Act. The new section requires the Commission to attended to attend provide the Attorney General, if requested, with information Committee member E S about a complaint against a judicial officer. The Commission Peter Whitehead 4 4 will not be required to provide this information if the Alex Smith AM 4 4 Commission considers that it is not in the public interest P to do so unless the complaint has been referred to the Murali Sagi PSM 4 4 O Conduct Division. The Commission is also required to notify Invitees Invited to attend L the Attorney General when a complaint has been referred to Ernest Schmatt PSM 3 4 II the Conduct Division and when, and the manner in which, such a complaint is disposed of. The operation of section Remy Ripoll 1 2 C 37A is retrospective so that it applies to complaints made Ruth Windeler 1 1 II before 21 June 2012. Malcolm Hozack 1 2 E S Phil O’Toole 2 2 Scott Webb 2 2 6.1.9 Audit and risk management A Jack Kheir 1 3 N The Chief Executive has overall accountability and David Daniels 0 1 D responsibility for the Commission’s operations. The Audit and Risk Management committee provides independent P advice and support to the Chief Executive on risk management, control and governance processes. The R committee operates under a charter that the Commission 1. Compliance with Treasury guidelines O has approved. The Committee is responsible for reviewing: The committee ensured that compliance with Treasury C • internal audit and control functions, including Guidelines TPP09-05 is well advanced. The committee E assessing their effectiveness and compliance with reviewed and updated its charter, established risk S section 11 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983 management standards and developed an internal audit S manual consistent with the standard set by the Treasury • the adequacy and quality of the internal control E structure Guidelines. The Commission’s internal audit and risk S management policy attestation is on p 81. • financial statements and reporting • financial and operational management • management responses to audit reports 2. Internal audit • internal audit results The committee settled and accepted the Internal Audit • risk management strategies: their effectiveness and Plan for 2011–12. The committee monitored: internal results. The Audit and Risk Management committee assists the Chief Executive to manage and control our risk exposures. Peter • the results of the 2011–12 Internal Audit Program Whitehead (r) is the independent Chair of the committee. He is assisted by committee member Alex Smith AM (centre). Scott The Audit and Risk Management committee comprises Peter consisting of Review of Expenditure and Revenue Webb (l) is invited to attend each committee meeting to represent the Internal Audit Bureau. Whitehead (independent Chair), Alex Smith AM (external • the implementation of the 2009–10 Review of member) and Murali Sagi PSM (internal member). Their Conferences Program qualifications and details are provided in Appendix 4 on • the performance of the outsourced internal audit • reviewed the currency of the Commission’s financial 6.2 Our policies p 114. Others invited to attend the committee meetings service provider, IAB Services. delegations and policies and affirmed the procedure to included the Chief Executive, Ernest Schmatt PSM; the regularly review all policies 6.2.1 Risk management policy Education Director, Ruth Windeler; Senior Finance Officer, • implemented the control framework for self- Our risk management policy is based on the Commission Remy Ripoll; Manager, Finance and Administration, 3. Risk management and business continuity assessment developed last year. The framework acting as a responsible corporate citizen committed to Malcolm Hozack; Phil O’Toole and Scott Webb of IAB provides an educative and management tool for closer The committee: protecting employees, consultants, customers, contractors Services; Jack Kheir and David Daniels of Financial Audit auditing of the Commission’s key risks and their property as well as the broader community and Services, the Audit Office of NSW. • assessed the results of the periodic occupational health and safety inspection for any risks discovered, • assessed the risk management of external software environment from unnecessary injury, loss or damage. action taken to mitigate those risks, and monitored projects compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety • conducted an annual half-day workshop for senior Our risk management policy is based on a risk register Outcomes 2011–12 Act 2000 management (with IAB Services) to examine key risks, which we regularly review. New risks are identified, considered and rated by the senior executives with the Four meetings were held during the year (last year: four). • identified the lack of timely and accurate sentencing confirm their currency and severity, and update the risk Figure 32 provides details of attendance at those meetings. data received from the courts as a major risk. It register. assistance of internal auditors. The risk register feeds into The committee monitored and provided advice about the monitored the level of inaccuracy of the latest set of the internal audit plan which is finalised after discussion following four areas. data from the courts and suggested steps to improve between the Chief Executive and internal auditors. Our this situation 4. External audit risk management policy is monitored by the Audit and Risk Management Committee which reports to the Chief • monitored the currency of the Commission’s Business The committee liaised with the external auditor, the Audit Executive. Continuity Plan (BCP) and assessed the results of the Office of NSW, and monitored the NSW Audit Client periodic information technology recovery testing Service Plan for 2011–12.
74 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 75 6
P R A Our key multicultural strategies for 2012—13 will include: 6.2.6 Public access to Government C • conducting a “community awareness of the judiciary information T program” (see p 52). Prominent community leaders I from Indigenous and culturally and linguistically diverse The Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (the backgrounds have been invited to participate in this GIPA Act) replaced the Freedom of Information Act 1989 C exciting innovation which we will launch next year from 1 July 2010. E • providing sessions on cultural diversity in our judicial S Section 125 of the GIPA Act requires that the Commission education program reports each year on our GIPA obligations. • updating information about interpreting in the Equality P Before the Law Bench Book The Commission is authorised, under section 7(1) of the O • working with the Community Relations Commission to GIPA Act, to publicly release our information unless there L develop sessions on interpreters. is an overriding public interest against disclosure. The I Commission’s complaint handling, investigative and reporting C functions are “excluded information” under Schedule 2 of the I 6.2.4 Insurance GIPA Act. This means that an access application cannot be E made for this information under the Act. We are a member of the NSW Treasury Managed Fund S of self insurance for government agencies. This provides comprehensive cover for physical assets such as plant and A equipment, motor vehicles and miscellaneous matters. The Review of proactive release program N managed fund provides coverage for staff through workers’ Our program to proactively release information involves D compensation and for the public through public liability cover. reviewing information as it is published, and making it available online for free as soon as practical or as hard P The premium determined is based on past performance. copy for a fee. In addition, the Commission may also make R The premium this year was $21,970 (last year: $ 21,362). further information available about our administrative, O research, sentencing and education functions unless it C would be contrary to the public interest to provide that E information. 6.2.5 Privacy management plan S Judicial officers often work with interpreters in the court room and we provide information about interpreters’ working During the year, we conducted no reviews under Part 5 of During the year we released the following information S conditions and their needs in our judicial education program. In May 2012, we attended a major conference at the Supreme Court in Darwin on interpreters and the law. The Chief Magistrate of the Northern Territory, Hilary Hannam (far right) and the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998. online and/or in hard copy: E Northern Territory Supreme Court judge, Jenny Blokland (left) are pictured with members of the Aboriginal Interpreter Service • Annual Report 2010–11 S and the Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission. Our Privacy Code of Practice and Privacy Management Plan are designed to deal with the unique issues that arise • Research Monograph No 36 Sentencing for common from our complaint handling function and the provision of offences in the NSW Children’s Court: 2010 6.2.2 OH&S policy • provided accredited interpreters for overseas sentencing information. • Sentencing Trends & Issues Number 40 “Common delegations who visited us during the year: see offences in the Local Court : 2010” Our OH&S policy is based on ensuring that our staff and Appendix 13 on p 122 We are seeking advice from the Office of the Privacy • Research and Conference Papers other people who are at the Commission’s place of work Commissioner on collecting, storing and distributing the • attended a conference on interpreters and the law • the following in PDF format: Civil Trials Bench Book, are not exposed to risks to their health or safety. The Chief personal information of speakers and participants at our at the Supreme Court in Darwin (“Language and the Criminal Trials Court Bench Book, Equality before the Executive retains ultimate responsibility for OH&S risk Law”, 25–27 May 2012) conferences. Law Bench Book, Local Court Bench Book, Sentencing management in our day-to-day operations. • published a major article on interpreters’ working Bench Book, Sexual Assault Handbook An OH&S trained representative carries out a quarterly conditions and their needs in Australian courts and • updates to all our bench books listed above, and inspection and any recommendations are attended to tribunals in the October 2012 issue of the Judicial • Concurrent Evidence: New Methods with Experts DVD without delay. Officers’ Bulletin (see Appendix 7 on p 118 for details) online. • advised the Commission’s Standing Advisory Committee on Judicial Education about interpreters’ needs in the courtroom 6.2.3 Multicultural policies and services • helped promote the November 2011 launch of the program Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration’s Challenge national survey into interpreter policies, practices and We consider the needs of a culturally diverse society when protocols • Balancing compliance with the Internal Audit Plan’s recommendations with planning our programs and service delivery. To promote other demands on our resources and budget. community harmony, access and equity, and to support the • conducted sessions on interpreters and cultural NSW Multicultural Policies and Services Plan, this year we: diversity in the education sessions: “Cultural barriers in the courtroom” and “Interpreters” at the National • employed eight people (20%) from a non-English Judicial Orientation Program, November 2011 and May speaking background 2012 (a joint program with the National Judicial College Looking ahead 2012–13 • provided current information for judicial officers about of Australia and the Australasian Institute of Judicial • Maintain a disclosure log to record information about any access applications Administration) the needs of people from culturally and linguistically made to us as required by the GIPA Act. diverse backgrounds who face potential barriers when • employed an Aboriginal Project Officer, Mrs Tammy participating in court proceedings. This information, Wright, to guide our Aboriginal Cultural Awareness • Continue to review our program for the release of information that should be contained in the Equality Before the Law Bench Book, program: see p 14. made publicly available without imposing unreasonable additional costs on our is also publicly available on our website. operations.
76 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 77 6
P R A Access applications feedback to their manager. Employees are encouraged to C identify their training needs and work with their manager to We received no formal access applications, including T develop an individual training plan. withdrawn applications (but not invalid applications). We I refused no formal access applications, either wholly or C partly, because the application was for information for which E there is a conclusive presumption of an overriding public 6.3.3 Guaranteeing our service and S interest against disclosure (information listed in Schedule 1, consumer response Clause 13 to the GIPA Act). We guarantee to investigate complaints about judicial P Statistical information about formal access applications is officers in a timely and effective manner and to inform O included in Appendix 16 on p 125. complainants regularly about the progress of their L complaints. Page xx shows our targets and the time I taken to examine complaints over a five-year period. If C a complaint is dismissed and a complainant seeks to 6.3 Our processes and technology I clarify the reasons for this, we respond promptly to such E Efficient processes and use of technology help us build a requests. S safe and strong organisation for our people and deliver high quality services. A 6.3.4 Delivering our services and N publications electronically D 6.3.1 Ensuring a safe working environment We provide a range of online services, including: Maree D’Arcy, the Commission’s librarian, supports our research, education and publishing programs. Maree has worked hard to place most of our library’s holdings online as a P The health and safety of our employees is a high priority. • information about the Commission, the complaints sustainability measure. Our Audit and Risk Management Committee oversees our process and the complaints form (see p 42) R O occupational health and safety (OH&S) compliance (see p 75). • the Judicial Information Research System (JIRS) 6.3.5 Providing library services • our librarian attended the annual Australian Law This year, we focused on: (see p 38) Librarians’ Association/New Zealand Law Librarians’ C Our library services support our research, education and E • identifying hazards • Lawcodes (see p 52) Association Conference, “ACTioning the law”, held publishing programs. The librarian also sources training Canberra in September 2011 S • minimising risks • bench books, including the Criminal Trial Courts Bench to improve the online legal research skills of staff and S • conducting emergency evacuation drills. Book, the Sentencing Bench Book, the Civil Trials • our librarian prepared for binding the 215th volume of maximise the Commission’s investment in legal information the confidential Meeting Papers of the Commission, a E Bench Book, the Equality Before the Law Bench Book, resources. We have a trained OH&S representative who conducts a the Local Court Bench Book and the Sexual Assault significant historical archive S safety inspection of the premises every three months. Three Handbook (see p 31) This year: • we organised advanced training for Publishing and employees are trained as fire wardens and their training Research staff in online legal information resources. • research and education publications (see p 119) • 218 items (last year: 238) were added to the online is regularly updated by the building management. All staff • publication orders on the NSW Government’s online catalogue so that the majority of the library’s holdings participate in evacuation drills. shop at www.shop.nsw.gov.au are now electronically available 6.3.6 Managing our records Three employees are trained to deliver first aid, CPR and • a Publication Guide and Access Application Form for • reference enquiries fell by 39% (last year: 32% defibrillation and two employees received first aid refresher the purposes of the Government Information (Public decrease). Resources borrowed from external libraries During the year no files were disposed of under our training this year. We maintain first aid kits in the workplace. Access) Act 2009 (see p 77) increased by 122% (last year: 61% decrease) “functional retention and disposal authority”. The • media releases, fact sheets and media statements • we renewed corporate membership of the Australian Commission’s record-keeping system was significantly No workers’ compensation claims were lodged this year enhanced to capture information on the content of each • our annual report. Library and Information Association (ALIA) and the (last year: none). There were no work-related illnesses or International Association of Law Libraries (IALL) file, current status and disposal information. The detailed prosecutions under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 • we continued to participate in the NSW Justice records management policy on our intranet provides a (last year: none). Consortium. This negotiates lower pricing structures framework and outlines responsibilities for the operation A major achievement this with legal publishers and helps us to achieve a of the Commission’s Records Management Program. We encourage staff to receive influenza immunisation and better resourced library with increased online access This applies to records in all formats, including electronic reimburse the cost of the booster. year was to make PDF to overseas and local databases while saving on records. Follow up training on the policy will be provided to subscription costs staff as necessary. versions of our bench books 6.3.2 Conducting performance reviews available for free download Our performance management system provides for regular Challenge reviews between supervisors and staff as well as formal to PCs and iPads . • Challenges for the library services continue to be the high cost of on-line annual appraisals for employees. Constructive feedback access to legal subscription services and the Commission’s expanded research is given and employees have the opportunity to provide and publishing programs. These put pressure on the library’s small budget.
Figure 33 Five-year trends in Workers’ Compensation claims and Occupational Health and Safety prosecutions Looking ahead 2012–13 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 • Train staff in our records management policy. WC OHS WC OHS WC OHS WC OHS WC OHS • Increase the range of online services as a sustainability measure. 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
78 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 79 6
P R A 6.4 Sustainability C T Reducing our carbon footprint and being part of the NSW Other sustainability measures included: I Government’s commitment to being carbon neutral by I • reducing waste generation by recycling all paper, C 2020 is part of our mission. cardboard, toner cartridges and computer equipment C E • briefing staff about environmental matters as a This year, we reduced our energy use by 5% (last year: 3% S standing item at staff meetings S reduction). Figure 34 shows a five-year comparison of the • reducing the impact of carbon emissions by offsetting Commission’s energy use. P carbon when purchasing air tickets for domestic and O In line with the NSW Government’s Waste Reduction and international travel L Purchasing Policy (WRAPP), we focussed on reducing • amending our procurement policy so that, where waste and increasing the purchase of recycled paper and appropriate, we source goods and services from I office consumables. This year we recycled 1.8 tonnes of environmentally responsible suppliers C waste paper (last year 1.7 tonnes) and bought 692 reams • continuing to investigate with building management the I of 100% recycled paper (last year: 667). The increase in possibility of recycling glass and plastics E paper use is due to a greater workload including two major • using 100% power saving computers and screens S research projects completed (see p 39). • minimising energy consumption after hours A • using double sided printing N • using online research platforms D Figure 34 Five-year trend in energy use • using online payment of accounts received and rendered P 600 550 GJ • publishing internal policies on our intranet. 521 GJ R 503 GJ 478 GJ 500 Target 433 GJ O 400 C Small organisations can make a difference and we are committed to sustainable business practices. This 300 E year we reduced our energy use, recycled 1.8 tonnes of paper, used 100% recycled paper and amended
Gigajoules 200 our procurement policy so that, where appropriate, we source goods and services from environmentally S responsible suppliers. 100 S E 0 S 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010-11 2011–12
Year Internal Audit and Risk Management Statement Internal Audit and Risk Management Statement for the 2011–12 Financial Year for the Judicial Commission of NSW I, Ernest John Schmatt, Chief Executive, am of the opinion that the Commission has internal audit and risk management Challenge processes in place that are, in all material respects, compliant with the core requirements set out in Treasury Circular • Improving our energy rating in an inherently environmentally inefficient building. NSW TC 09/05 Internal Audit and Risk Management Policy. In determining the model for internal audit service delivery, the Commission has considered the size of the agency in terms of both staffing levels and budget and the need to provide assurance, independent from operational management on risk management, control and governance processes and has outsourced the function. Looking ahead 2012–13 I, Ernest John Schmatt, Chief Executive, am of the opinion that the Audit and Risk Committee for the Judicial Commission is constituted and operates in accordance with the independence and governance requirements of Treasury • Work to improve our two star NABERS energy rating. Circular NSW TC 09-0. The Chair and Members of the Audit and Risk Committee are: • Review our internal guidelines for reducing our energy consumption. • Mr Peter Whitehead, independent Chair (Appointed on 31 July 2008 and renewed on 1 July 2011 for two years) • Regularly brief staff on our energy consumption and ways to reduce waste. • Mr Alex Smith AM, independent Member • Give preference to conference venues that are carbon neutral. (Appointed on 1 July 2009 and renewed on 1 July 2011 for 2 years ) • Mr Murali Sagi PSM, non-independent Member Director, Information Management (Appointed on 31 July 2008)
These processes provide a level of assurance that enables the senior management of the Judicial Commission to understand, manage and satisfactorily control risk exposures.
E J Schmatt Chief Executive, Judicial Commission of NSW Dated: 17 August 2012
80 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 PRACTICES, POLICIES AND PROCESSES 81 7. FINANCE We returned a small surplus of $18,000, reversing last year’s Outcomes • Revenue decreased by 3.1% negative result. • Expenses contained with a decrease of 3.7% • Financial result was a small surplus of $18,000
Targets 2012–13 • Maintain expenditure at 2011–12 levels • Pursue opportunities to raise revenue where there is a demand for our expertise
Total assets increased by $37,000
Contents 7.1 Financial summary ...... 84 7.2 Financial performance ...... 85 7.3 Financial report ...... 86
82 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 83 7
F I N 7.1 Financial summary 7.2 Financial performance A N C Our financial result was a surplus of Expenditure Liabilities Payment of accounts Consultants Credit card certification E $18,000 (last year: $18,000 deficit). Expenses this year totalled $5.870 Total liabilities increased slightly by We paid all accounts on time and were We did not engage any consultants The Chief Executive certifies that million, being a decrease of $224,000 $16,000 mainly due to an increase in not required to pay penalty interest on this year. credit card usage in the Commission from last year. provisions. any account: see Figures 38 and 39. has met best practice guidelines Revenue in accordance with Premier’s Principal source of revenue is Employee-related expenses were Memoranda and Treasury Directions. government contributions of $5.215 $4.334 million or 74% of total million (last year: $5.395 million). expenses. Figure 38 Aged analysis at the end of each quarter Other revenue items were $554,000 from sale of goods and services and Assets Quarter Current Less than 30 days Between 30 and Between 60 and 90 More than 90 $119,000 from interest and other (within due date) overdue 60 days overdue days overdue days overdue Total assets increased marginally by sources: see Figure 35. $ $ $ $ $ $37,000. September 2011 8,327.76 nil nil nil nil
Figure 35 Revenue December 2011 86,060.05 nil nil nil nil March 2012 99,900.26 nil nil nil nil 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 June 2012 10,739.03 nil nil nil nil $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
Government contributions 4,757 4,645 4,944 5,395 5,215
Sale of goods & services 456 449 418 517 554 Figure 39 Accounts paid on time within each quarter
Investment revenue 73 61 56 73 66 Quarter Total accounts paid on time Total amount paid Other revenue 69 168 213 91 53 Target % Actual % $ $ Total 5,355 5,323 5,631 6,076 5,888 September 2011 100 100 8,327.76 8,327.76
December 2011 100 100 86,060.05 86,060.05
Figure 36 Expenses March 2012 100 100 99,900.26 99,900.26
June 2012 100 100 10,739.03 10,739.03 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
$’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
Employee related 3,673 3,868 3,986 4,022 4,334
Other operating expenses 1,594 1,504 1,302 1,350 1,413
Other expenses (Conduct Division) 0 0 280 642 33
Depreciation & Amortisation 108 99 87 80 90
Total 5,375 5,471 5,655 6,094 5,870 Remy Ripoll (l) and Jenny Zhang (r) work with Malcolm Hozack (pictured on p 83) in our Corporate Services team to manage the Commission’s Figure 37 Service group expenditure 2008–12 finances and payroll.
3.5 3.23 3.09 2.94 3.04 3.0
2.5 2.15 1.96 1.98 1.97 2.0 $ M 1.5 1.00 1.0 0.72 0.48 0.5 0.41
0 Judicial education Research & sentencing Complaints
2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12
84 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 85 7
F I N 7.3 Financial report A N C E Independent auditor’s report ...... 87 Certification of financial report ...... 88 Statement of comprehensive income ...... 89 Statement of financial position ...... 90 Statement of changes in equity ...... 91 Statement of cash flows ...... 92 Service group statements ...... 93 Summary of compliance with financial directives ...... 94 Notes to and forming part of the financial statements ...... 95 1. Summary of significant accounting policies ...... 95 2. Expenses excluding losses ...... 99 3. Revenue ...... 100 4. Gain/(Loss) on Disposal ...... 100 5. Other gains/(Losses) ...... 100 6. Service groups of the Commission ...... 101 7. Current assets — cash and cash equivalents ...... 101 8. Current assets — receivables ...... 101 9. Non-current assets — plant and equipment ...... 102 10. Intangible assets ...... 103 11. Current liabilities — payables ...... 104 12. Current/non-current liabilities — provisions ...... 104 13. Current liabilities — other ...... 104 14. Commitments for expenditure ...... 104 15. Contingent liabilities and contingent assets ...... 104 16. Budget review ...... 105 17. Reconciliation of net cash flows from operating activities to net cost of services ...... 105 18. Financial instruments ...... 105
19. After balance date events ...... 107
86 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 87 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Statement of comprehensive income N C for the year ended 30 June 2012 E
Notes Actual Budget Actual 2012 2012 2011 $’000 $’000 $’000
Expenses Excluding Losses Operating expenses Employee related 2(a) 4,334 4,062 4,022 Other operating expenses 2(b) 1,413 1,542 1,350 Depreciation and amortisation 2(c) 90 90 80 Other expenses 2(d) 33 – 642 Total Expenses Excluding Losses 5,870 5,694 6,094
Revenue Recurrent appropriation 3(a) 4,748 4,855 5,013 Capital appropriation 3(a) 89 150 125 Acceptance by the Crown Entity of employee benefits and other liabilities 3(e) 378 222 257 Sales of goods and services 3(b) 554 400 517 Investment revenue 3(c) 66 67 73 Grants and contributions 3(d) – – – Other revenue 3(f) 53 41 91 Total Revenue 5,888 5,735 6,076
Net Result 17 18 41 (18)
Other comprehensive income – – – TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME 18 41 (18)
Certification of Financial Statements
Pursuant to section 45F of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, I state that: (a) the Judicial Commission’s Financial Statements is a general purpose financial report which has been prepared The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements in accordance with applicable Australian Accounting Standards and other mandatory professional reporting requirements, the requirements of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, the requirements of the finance reporting directives published in the Financial Reporting Code for Budget Dependent General Government Sector Agencies, the Public Finance and Audit Regulation 2010 and the Treasurer’s Directions; (b) the financial statements exhibit a true and fair view of the financial position and transactions of the Judicial Commission of New South Wales for the year ended 30 June 2012; and (c) there are no circumstances which would render any particulars included in the financial statements to be misleading or inaccurate.
E.J. SCHMATT Chief Executive Dated: 15 August 2012
88 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 89 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Statement of financial position Statement of changes in equity N C as at 30 June 2012 for the year ended 30 June 2012 E
Notes Actual Budget Actual Accumulated 2012 2012 2011 Funds Total $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
ASSETS Balance at 1 July 2011 1,054 1,054 Current assets Net Result 18 18 Cash and cash equivalents 7 1,530 1,354 1,463 Total other comprehensive income – – Receivables 8 65 66 95 Total comprehensive income for the year 18 18 Total Current Assets 1,595 1,420 1,558 Balance at 30 June 2012 1,072 1,072
Non-Current Assets Balance at 1 July 2010 1,072 1,072 Plant and equipment 9 303 373 298 Net Result (18) (18) Intangible assets 10 10 – 15 Total other comprehensive income – – Total Non-Current Assets 313 373 313 Total comprehensive income for the year (18) (18) Balance at 30 June 2011 1,054 1,054 Total Assets 1,908 1,793 1,871
LIABILITIES The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements Current Liabilities Payables 11 351 226 385 Provisions 12 473 462 405 Other 13 – – 18 Total Current Liabilities 824 688 808
Non-Current Liabilities Provisions 12 12 10 9 Total Non-Current Liabilities 12 10 9
Total Liabilities 836 698 817
Net Assets 1,072 1,095 1,054
EQUITY Accumulated funds 1,072 1,095 1,054 Total Equity 1,072 1,095 1,054
The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements
90 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 91 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Statement of cash flows Service group statement* N C for the year ended 30 June 2012 E
Notes Actual Budget Actual Service Group 1* Service Group 2* Service Group 3* Not Attributable Total 2012 2012 2011 COMMISSION’S 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 $’000 $’000 $’000 EXPENSES & INCOME $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Expenses Excluding Losses Payments Operating expenses Employee related 2,280 2,124 1721 1,580 333 319 – – 4,334 4,022 Employee related (3,847) (3,823) (3,714) Other operating expenses 903 876 398 362 112 112 – – 1,413 1,350 Other (1,643) (1,803) (2,521) Depreciation and amortisation 51 46 35 31 4 3 – – 90 80 Total Payments (5,490) (5,626) (6,235) Other expenses – – – – 33 642 – – 33 642 Total Expenses Excluding 3,234 3,046 2,154 1,973 482 1,076 – – 5,870 6,094 Losses Receipts Revenue Recurrent appropriation 4,748 4,855 5,031 Recurrent Appropriation** – – – – – – 4,748 5,013 4,748 5,013 Capital appropriation 90 150 125 Capital Appropriation – – – – – – 89 125 89 125 Cash transfers to Consolidated Fund – (18) – Acceptance by the Crown Entity 215 146 148 100 15 10 – – 378 257 of employee benefits and other Sale of goods and services 689 390 895 liabilities Interest received 67 70 63 Sales of goods and services 17 15 537 502 – – – – 554 517 Investment revenue – – – – – – 66 73 66 73 Grants and contributions – – – Grants and contributions – – – – – – – – – – Other 53 220 91 Other revenue 31 73 20 10 2 8 – – 53 91 Total Receipts 5,647 5,667 6,205 Total Revenue 263 234 705 612 17 18 4,903 5,211 5,888 6,076 Net Result (2,971) (2,812) (1,449) (1,361) (465) (1,058) 4,903 5,211 18 (18) Total other comprehensive – – – – – – – – – – NET CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES 17 157 41 (30) income TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE (2,971) (2,812) (1,449) (1,361) (465) (1,058) 4,903 5,211 18 (18) INCOME CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES COMMISSION’S ASSETS & LIABILITIES Purchases of plant and equipment (90) (150) (125) Current Assets NET CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES (90) (150) (125) Cash and cash equivalents – – – – – – 1,530 1,463 1,530 1,463 Receivables 37 54 25 37 3 4 – – 65 95 NET INCREASE/(DECREASE) IN CASH 67 (109) (155) Total Current Assets 37 54 25 37 3 4 1,530 1,463 1,595 1,558 Opening Cash and Cash Equivalents 1,463 1,463 1,618 Non-Current Assets CLOSING CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 7 1,530 1,354 1,463 Plant and equipment 170 168 119 116 14 14 – – 303 298 Intangible assets 6 8 4 6 0 1 – – 10 15 Total Non-Current Assets 176 176 123 122 14 15 – – 313 313 TOTAL ASSETS 213 230 148 159 17 19 1,530 1,463 1,908 1,871 The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements Current Liabilities Payables 199 217 137 151 15 17 – – 351 384 Provisions 239 202 205 177 29 26 – – 473 405 Other – – – – – 18 – – – 18 Total Current Liabilities 438 419 342 328 44 61 – – 824 808 Non-Current Liabilities Provisions 6 5 5 4 – – – – 12 9 Total Non-Current Liabilities 6 5 5 4 1 – – – 12 9 TOTAL LIABILITIES 444 424 347 332 45 61 – – 836 817 NET ASSETS (231) (194) (199) (173) (28) (42) 1,530 1,463 1,072 1,054
* The names and purposes of each service group are summarised in Note 6 . ** Appropriations are made on an agency basis and not to individual service groups . Consequently, appropriations must be included in the ‘Not Attributable’ column .
92 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 93 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Summary of compliance with Financial Directives Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E
2012 2011 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT (c) Statement of Compliance are generally recognised as income ACCOUNTING POLICIES These financial statements and when the Commission obtains Recurrent Expenditure/ Capital Expenditure/ Recurrent Expenditure/ Capital Expenditure/ notes comply with Australian control over the assets comprising Appropriation Net Claim on Appropriation Net Claim on Appropriation Net Claim on Appropriation Net Claim on (a) Reporting Entity Consolidated Consolidated Consolidated Consolidated Accounting Standards, which the appropriations / contributions. The Judicial Commission of New Fund Fund Fund Fund include Australian Accounting Control over appropriations South Wales (the Commission) is $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 Interpretations. and contributions are normally a NSW government agency which obtained upon the receipt of cash. ORIGINAL BUDGET/ does not have any entities under APPROPRIATION (d) Insurance Appropriations are not recognised EXPENDITURE its control. The entity’s insurance activities as income in the following Appropriation Act 4,855 4,748 150 89 4,371 4,371 150 125 The Commission is a corporation are conducted through the NSW circumstances: Additional – – – – set up under the Judicial Officers Treasury Managed Fund Scheme • ‘Equity appropriations’ to fund appropriations Act 1986. The Commission is a of self-insurance for Government payments to adjust a for- 4,855 4,748 150 89 4,371 4,371 150 125 not-for-profit entity, as profit is entities. profit entity’s capital structure not its principal objective and it are recognised as equity OTHER The expense (premium) is APPROPRIATIONS/ has no cash generating units. The injections (i.e. contribution determined by the Fund Manager EXPENDITURE reporting entity is consolidated as by owners) on receipt and based on past claim experience. Treasurer’s Advance – – – – 660 642 – – part of the NSW Total State Sector equity withdrawals on payment Total Appropriations/ 4,855 4,748 150 89 5,031 5,013 150 125 Accounts. to a for-profit entity. The (e) Accounting for the Goods and Expenditure/ reconciliation between the These financial statements for the Services Tax (GST) Net Claim on statement of comprehensive Consolidated Fund year ended 30 June 2012 has been Income, expenses and assets are income, statement of summary (includes transfer authorised for issue by the Chief recognised net of the amount of payments) of compliance with financial Executive on 15 August 2012. GST, except that: directives and the total Amount drawn down 4,748 89 5,031 125 • the amount of GST incurred appropriations is disclosed in against Appropriation (b) Basis of Preparation by the entity as a purchaser Note 3(a). Liability to – – 18 – The entity’s financial statements Consolidated Fund* that is not recoverable from the • Unspent appropriations are are general purpose financial Australian Taxation Office is recognised as liabilities rather statements which have been recognised as part of the cost than revenue, as the authority The Summary of Compliance is based on the assumption that Consolidated Fund moneys are spent first (except where otherwise identified or prepared in accordance with: prescribed) . of acquisition of an asset or as to spend the money lapses * Liability to Consolidated Fund represents the difference between the “Amount drawn down against Appropriation” and the “Total Expenditure/Net • applicable Australian part of an item of expense and and the unspent amount must Claim on Consolidated Fund” . Accounting Standards (which • receivables and payables are be repaid to the Consolidated include Australian Accounting stated with the amount of GST Fund. The liability is disclosed Interpretations); included. in Note 13 as part of ‘Current • the requirements of the Public liabilities - Other’. The amount Cash flows are included in the cash Finance and Audit Act 1983 will be repaid and the liability flow statement on a gross basis. and Regulation; and will be extinguished next However the GST components of financial year. • the Financial Reporting cash flows arising from investing Directions published in the (ii) Sale of Goods activities which is recoverable Financial Reporting Code for Revenue from the sale of goods is from, or payable to, the Australian General Government Sector recognised as revenue when the Taxation Office are classified as entities or issued by the entity transfers the significant risks operating cash flows. Treasurer. and rewards of ownership of the assets. Plant and equipment are measured (f) Income Recognition at fair value through profit and loss. Income is measured at the fair (iii) Rendering of Services Other financial statement items are value of the consideration or Revenue is recognised when the prepared in accordance with the contribution received or receivable. service is provided or by reference historical cost convention. Additional comments regarding to the stage of completion (based Judgments, key assumptions and the accounting policies for on labour hours incurred to date). estimations management has the recognition of income are (iv) Investment Revenue made are disclosed in the relevant discussed below. Interest revenue is recognised notes to the financial statements. (i) Parliamentary appropriations using the effective interest method and contributions All amounts are rounded to the as set out in AASB 139 Financial nearest one thousand dollars Except as specified below, Instruments: Recognition and and are expressed in Australian parliamentary appropriations and Measurement. currency. contributions from other bodies (including grants and donations)
94 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 95 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E (g) Assets legal, financial and socio-political All material separately identifiable All research costs are expensed. For financial assets carried at (ii) Employee benefits and other (i) Acquisitions of assets environment. However, in the components of assets are Development costs are only amortised cost, the amount of provisions The cost method of accounting is limited circumstances where there depreciated over their shorter capitalised when certain criteria the allowance is the difference a. Salaries and wages, annual used for the initial recording of all are feasible alternative uses, assets useful lives. are met. between the asset’s carrying leave, sick leave and on- acquisitions of assets controlled are valued at their highest and best amount and the present value costs The estimated useful lives of the The useful lives of intangible assets by the entity. Cost is the amount use. of estimated future cash flows, asset classes are: are assessed to be finite. Liabilities for salaries and of cash or cash equivalents paid discounted at the effective interest Fair value of plant and equipment wages (including non- or the fair value of the other Computer Equipment — 3 years Intangible assets are subsequently rate. The amount of the impairment is determined based on the best monetary benefits), annual Furniture and Fittings — 15 years measured at fair value only if consideration given to acquire the loss is recognised in the net result leave and paid sick leave available market evidence, including there is an active market. As asset at the time of its acquisition Office Equipment — 5 or 10 years for the year. that are due to be settled current market selling prices for the there is no active market for the or construction or, where (xi) De-recognition of financial within 12 months after the same or similar assets. Where there (vi) Maintenance entity’s intangible assets, the applicable, the amount attributed assets and financial liabilities end of the period in which is no available market evidence, Day-to-day servicing costs or assets are carried at cost less any to that asset when initially the employees render the the asset’s fair value is measured maintenance are charged as accumulated amortisation. A financial asset is derecognised recognised in accordance with the at its market buying price, the best expenses as incurred, except where when the contractual rights to the service are recognised requirements of other Australian and measured in respect indicator of which is depreciated they relate to the replacement of a The entity’s intangible assets are cash flows from the financial assets Accounting Standards. amortised using the straight line of employees’ services replacement cost. part or component of an asset, in expire; or if the entity transfers the method over a period of three (3) up to the reporting date Assets acquired at no cost, or for which case the costs are capitalised financial asset: As the entity does not own land, years. at undiscounted amounts nominal consideration, are initially and depreciated. • where substantially all the building or infrastructure assets, based on the amounts recognised at their fair value at the Intangible assets are tested for risks and rewards have been management does not believe (vii) Leased assets expected to be paid when date of acquisition. impairment where an indicator transferred or that the revaluation of physical A distinction is made between the liabilities are settled. of impairment exists. If the non-current assets every five years finance leases which effectively • where the entity has not Fair value is the amount for which recoverable amount is less than Unused non-vesting sick is warranted, unless it becomes transfer from the lessor to the transferred substantially all the an asset could be exchanged its carrying amount the carrying leave does not give rise aware of any material difference in lessee substantially all the risks and rewards, if the entity between knowledgeable, willing amount is reduced to recoverable to a liability as it is not the carrying amount of any class of risks and benefits incidental to has not retained control. parties in an arm’s length amount and the reduction is considered probable that assets. transaction. ownership of the leased assets, recognised as an impairment loss. Where the entity has neither sick leave taken in the and operating leases under which transferred nor retained future will be greater than Where payment for an asset is Most of the entity’s assets are non- (ix) Loans and receivables the lessor effectively retains all substantially all the risks and deferred beyond normal credit specialised assets with short useful the benefits accrued in the such risks and benefits. Loans and receivables are non- rewards or transferred control, the future. terms, its cost is the cash price lives and are therefore measured derivative financial assets with asset is recognised to the extent of equivalent, i.e. deferred payment at depreciated historical cost, as a Where a non-current asset is The outstanding amounts fixed or determinable payments the entity’s continuing involvement amount is effectively discounted at surrogate for fair value. acquired by means of a finance that are not quoted in an active of payroll tax, workers’ lease, the asset is recognised at its in the asset. an asset-specific rate. (iv) Impairment of plant and market. These financial assets are compensation insurance fair value at the commencement of (ii) Capitalisation thresholds equipment recognised initially at fair value, A financial liability is derecognised premiums and fringe the lease term. The corresponding when the obligation specified in the benefits tax, which Plant and equipment and intangible As a not-for-profit entity with usually based on the transaction liability is established at the same cost or face value. Subsequent contract is discharged or cancelled are consequential to assets costing $5,000 and above no cash generating units, AASB amount. Lease payments are measurement is at amortised or expired. employment, are recognised individually (or forming part of a 136 Impairment of Assets is not allocated between the principal cost using the effective interest as liabilities and expenses network costing more than $5,000) applicable. This is because AASB (xii) Other Assets component and the interest method, less an allowance for where the employee benefits are capitalised. Individual items 136 modifies the recoverable Other assets are recognised on a expense. any impairment of receivables. to which they relate have of computer or office equipment amount test to the higher of cost basis. Any changes are accounted for been recognised. costing $500 and above and fair value less costs to sell and Operating lease payments are in the net result for the year when having a useful life of more than depreciated replacement cost. This charged to the statement of b. Long service leave and impaired, derecognised or through (h) Liabilities one year are also capitalised. means that, for an asset already comprehensive income in the superannuation the amortisation process. (i) Payables measured at fair value, impairment periods in which they are incurred. (iii) Revaluation of property, plant These amounts represent liabilities The entity’s liabilities can only arise if selling costs are Short-term receivables with no and equipment (viii) Intangible assets for goods and services provided for long service leave material. Selling costs are regarded stated interest rate are measured Physical non-current assets are The entity recognises intangible to the entity and other amounts. and defined benefit as immaterial. at the original invoice amount valued in accordance with the assets only if it is probable that Payables are recognised initially superannuation are where the effect of discounting is “Valuation of Physical Non-Current (v) Depreciation of plant and future economic benefits will flow at fair value, usually based on the assumed by the Crown equipment immaterial. Assets at Fair Value” Policy and to the entity and the cost of the transaction cost or face value. Entity. The entity accounts Guidelines Paper Depreciation is provided for asset can be measured reliably. (x) Impairment of financial assets Subsequent measurement is at for the liability as having (TPP 07-1). This policy adopts fair on a straight-line basis for all Intangible assets are measured All financial assets, except those amortised cost using the effective been extinguished resulting value in accordance with AASB depreciable assets so as to write initially at cost. Where an asset is measured at fair value through interest method. Short-term in the amount assumed being shown as part of the 116 Property, Plant and Equipment. off the depreciable amount of each acquired at no or nominal cost, the profit and loss, are subject to an payables with no stated interest non-monetary revenue item asset as it is consumed over its cost is its fair value as at the date annual review for impairment. rate are measured at the original Plant and equipment is measured described as “Acceptance useful life to the entity. of acquisition. An allowance for impairment is invoice amount where the effect of on an existing use basis, where established when there is objective discounting is immaterial. by the Crown Entity of there are no feasible alternative evidence that the entity will not be employee benefits and uses in the existing natural, able to collect all amounts due. other liabilities”.
96 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 97 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E Long service leave is (i) Equity and reserves • AASB 1053 and AASB 2010-2 2012 2011 measured at present (i) Accumulated funds include regarding differential reporting $’000 $’000 value in accordance with all current and prior period • AASB 2010-8 regarding AASB 119 Employee retained funds. deferred tax 2. EXPENSES EXCLUDING LOSSES Benefits. This is based • AASB 2010-10 regarding (ii) Separate reserve accounts (a) Employee related expenses: on the application of removal of fixed dates for first Salaries and wages (including recreation leave) 3,563 3,391 certain factors (specified are recognised in the time adopters Superannuation — defined benefit plans 91 96 in NSWTC 11/06) to financial statements only if • AASB 2011-3 regarding orderly Superannuation — defined contributions plans 178 162 employees with five or such accounts are required adoption of changes to the Long service leave 283 156 more years of service, by specific legislation or ABS GFS Manual Workers’ compensation insurance 15 15 using current rates of Australian Accounting • AASB 2011-4 removing Payroll tax and fringe benefit tax 204 202 pay. These factors were Standards. individual KMP disclosure 4,334 4,022 determined based on (j) Budgeted Amounts requirements an actuarial review to The budgeted amounts are • AASB 2011-9 regarding (b) Other operating expenses: approximate present value. drawn from original budgeted presentation of items of other Operating lease rental expense — minimum lease payments 487 493 financial statements presented The superannuation comprehensive income Fees for services 58 57 to Parliament in respect of the expense for the financial • AASB 2011-12 regarding Contractors 165 128 reporting period, as adjusted for year is determined by using Interpretation 20 Conferences 144 193 section 24 of the Public Finance the formulae specified in Printing 115 69 and Audit Act 1983 where there • AASB 2011-13 regarding the Treasurer’s Directions. Member fees 82 83 has been a transfer of functions AASB 1049 and GAAP/GFS The expense for certain Stores and equipment 10 10 between departments. Other harmonisation superannuation schemes Books and periodicals 59 58 amendments made to the budget • The Commission does not (i.e. Basic Benefit and First Postal and telephone 64 55 are not reflected in the budgeted expect the adoption of these State Super) is calculated Training 28 26 amounts. Standards in future periods to as a percentage of the Travel expenses 36 36 materially impact the financial employees’ salary. For (k) Comparative information statements. Electricity 27 25 other superannuation Except when an Australian Insurance 5 5 schemes (i.e. State Accounting Standard permits or Auditor’s remuneration — audit of the financial statement 19 18 Superannuation Scheme requires otherwise, comparative Recruitment – 1 and State Authorities information is disclosed in respect Maintenance 29 22 Superannuation Scheme), of the previous period for all Other 85 71 the expense is calculated amounts reported in the financial 1,413 1,350 as a multiple of the statements. employees’ superannuation Reconciliation — Total maintenance (l) New Australian Accounting contributions. Standards issued but not Maintenance expense — contracted labour and other c. Other Provisions effective (non-employee related), as above 29 22 The following new Accounting Employee related maintenance expense included in Note 2(a) – – Other provisions exist Standards have not been applied Total maintenance expenses included in Note 2(a) + 2(b) 29 22 when: the entity has and are not yet effective. a present legal or (c) Depreciation and amortisation expense • AASB 9 and AASB 2010-7 constructive obligation as Depreciation a result of a past event; it is regarding financial instruments Computer equipment 46 45 probable that an outflow of • AASB 13 and AASB 2011-8 Office furniture 21 17 resources will be required regarding fair value Office equipment 17 17 to settle the obligation; and measurement 84 79 a reliable estimate can be • AASB 119, AASB 2011-10 made of the amount of the and AASB 2011-11 regarding Amortisation obligation. employee benefits Intangible assets 6 1 90 80 (d) Other expenses Conduct Division 33 642 33 642
98 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 99 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E
2012 2011 2012 2011 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
3. REVENUE 6. SERVICE GROUPS OF THE COMMISSION (a) Appropriations (a) Judicial Education Comprising Recurrent Appropriations below Purpose: A better informed and professional judiciary by providing an extensive conference and (per Summary of Compliance) 4,748 5,013 seminar program for judicial officers and by publishing professional reference material. Less: Liability to Consolidated Fund (per Summary of Compliance) – – 4,748 5,013 (b) Research and Sentencing Purpose: Improved consistency of approach in sentencing by providing online statistical and Capital appropriations legal information and by undertaking original research and analysis of aspects of Comprising Capital Appropriations below sentencing. (per Summary of Compliance) 89 125 Less: Liability to Consolidated Fund (c) Examination of Complaints (per Summary of Compliance) – – Purpose: Examination of complaints against judicial officers in accordance with statutory 89 125 provisions.
(b) Sale of goods and services Assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are not directly attributable to a Service Sale of goods 78 72 Group are apportioned according to the number of staff directly contributing to each Rendering of services 476 445 Service Group. Government appropriations, cash and cash equivalents and investment 554 517 revenue cannot be reliably attributed and are therefore included in the “Not-attributable” column. (c) Investment revenue Interest 66 73 7. CURRENT ASSETS — CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS Cash at bank and on hand 1,530 1,463 1,530 1,463 (d) Grants and contributions Contributions – – For the purpose of the statement of cash flows, cash and cash equivalents include cash at bank and cash on hand. Acceptance by the Crown Entity of employee benefits and other liabilities Cash and cash equivalent assets recognised in the statement of financial position are (e) The following liabilities and/or expenses have been assumed by the Crown Entity or other government entities: reconciled at the end of the financial year to the statement of cash flows as follows:
Superannuation — defined benefit 90 96 Cash and cash equivalents (per statement of financial position) 1,530 1,463 Long service leave 283 156 Closing cash and cash equivalents (per statement of cash flows) 1,530 1,463 Payroll tax 5 5 378 257 8. CURRENT ASSETS — RECEIVABLES Sale of goods and services 3 11 (f) Other revenue 53 91 Other receivables 6 4 Interest receivable 33 35 4. Gain/(Loss) on Disposal Prepayments 23 45 65 95 5. Other Gains/(Losses)
100 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 101 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E
9. NON-CURRENT ASSETS — PLANT AND EQUIPMENT 10. INTANGIBLE ASSETS Plant and Software Total Total Equipment As at 1 July 2011 – fair value $’000 $’000 At 1 July 2011 – fair value $’000 $’000 Gross carrying amount 98 98 Gross carrying amount 1,313 1,313 Accumulated depreciation and impairment 83 83 1,015 1,015 Less: Accumulated depreciation and impairment Net carrying amount 15 15 Net carrying amount — at fair value 298 298
As at 30 June 2012 – fair value $’000 $’000 At 30 June 2012 – fair value $’000 $’000 Gross carrying amount 98 98 Gross carrying amount 1,393 1,393 Less: Accumulated amortisation and impairment 88 88 Less: Accumulated depreciation and impairment 1,090 1,090 Net carrying amount — at fair value 10 10 Net carrying amount — at fair value 303 303
Reconciliation Reconciliations Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of plant and equipment at the beginning and Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of plant and equipment at the beginning and end of the current and previous financial year are set out below. end of the current and previous financial year are set out below. Plant and Software Total Equipment Total Year ended 30 June 2012 $’000 $’000 Year ended 30 June 2012 $’000 $’000 Net carrying amount at start of year 15 15 Net carrying amount at start of year 298 298 Additions – – Additions 90 90 Disposals – – Disposals – – Depreciation 5 5 Depreciation 85 85 Net carrying amount at end of year 10 10 Net carrying amount at end of year 303 303
Software Total Plant and Equipment Total As at 1 July 2010 – fair value $’000 $’000 At 1 July 2010 – fair value $’000 $’000 Gross carrying amount 82 82 Gross carrying amount 1,347 1,347 Accumulated depreciation and impairment 82 82 Accumulated depreciation and impairment 1,079 1,079 Net carrying amount – – Net carrying amount 268 268 As at 30 June 2011 – fair value $’000 $’000 Plant and Gross carrying amount 98 98 Equipment Total Less: Accumulated amortisation and impairment 83 83 At 30 June 2011 – fair value $’000 $’000 Net carrying amount — at fair value 15 15 Gross carrying amount 1,313 1,313
Less: Accumulated depreciation and impairment 1,015 1,015 Reconciliation Net carrying amount — at fair value 298 298 Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of plant and equipment at the beginning and end of the current and previous financial year are set out below. Reconciliations
Reconciliations of the carrying amounts of plant and equipment at the beginning and Software Total end of the current and previous financial year are set out below. Year ended 30 June 2011 – fair value $’000 $’000 Plant and Equipment Total Net carrying amount at start of year – – Year ended 30 June 2011 $’000 $’000 Additions 16 16 Net carrying amount at start of year 268 268 Disposals – – Additions 109 109 Depreciation 1 1 Disposals – – Net carrying amount at end of year 15 15 Depreciation 79 79 Net carrying amount at end of year 298 298
102 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 103 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E
2012 2011 2010 $’000 $’000 $’000
11. CURRENT LIABILITIES — PAYABLES 16. BUDGET REVIEW Creditors 172 241 Net Result Accrued salaries, wages and on-costs 174 135 The actual net result is under budget by $23,000. This is mainly due to increased Other (including GST payable) 5 9 provisions required for employee entitlements, however incurred lower expenditure on Conduct Divisions of only $33,000, and increased own sales revenue. 351 385
Assets and Liabilities 12. CURRENT/NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES — PROVISIONS Non-current Assets are under budget by $60,000. This is mainly due to lower than Employee benefits and related on-costs expected Capital purchases. Current Current Liabilities is over budget by $136,000 mainly due to actual salary accruals of Recreation leave 255 225 $174,000 and other creditors of $174,000 being higher than budget salary accruals of On-costs 218 180 $94,000 and other creditors of $132,000. 473 405 Cash flow from Operating Activities Non-Current Net Cash Flows from operating activities resulted with a positive $157,000 is over budget of $41,000 by $116,000. This is mainly due to higher sales of own services. On-costs 12 9 12 9 2012 2011 $’000 $’000 Aggregate employee benefits and related on-costs 17. RECONCILIATION OF NET CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES TO NET Provisions — current 473 405 COST OF SERVICES Provisions — non-current 12 9 Net cash used on operating activities 157 (30) Accrued salaries, wages and on-costs (refer Note 11) 174 135 Acceptance by the Crown Entity of employee benefits and other liabilities – (18) 659 549 Depreciation (90) (80) Decrease/(increase) in provisions (71) (17) 13. CURRENT LIABILITIES — OTHER Increase/(decrease) in receivables (30) 29 Liability to Consolidated fund – 18 Decrease/(increase) in creditors 34 (107) – 18 Cash transfer to Consolidated Fund 18 205 Net Result 18 (18) 14. COMMITMENTS FOR EXPENDITURE Operating lease commitments Future non-cancellable operating lease rentals not provided for and payable: 18. FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS The entity’s principal financial instruments are outlined below. These financial instruments arise directly from the entity’s operations or are required to finance the entity’s operations. Not later than one year 540 534 The entity does not enter into any trade financial instruments, including derivative Later than one year and not later than five years 1,237 1,737 financial instruments, for speculative purposes. Later than five years – – The entity’s main risks arising from financial instruments are outlined below, together Total (including GST) 1,777 2,271 with the entity’s objectives, policies and processes for measuring and managing risk. Further quantitative and qualitative disclosures are included throughout these financial Operating lease commitments, which relate to rent and motor vehicles, are not statements. recognised in the financial report as liabilities. The total commitments for expenditure as at 30 June 2012 include input tax credits of $162,000 ($206,000 in 2010–2011) The Chief Executive has overall responsibility for the establishment and oversight of risk which are recoverable from the Australian Tax Office. management and reviews and agrees policies for managing each of these risks. The Audit and Risk Management Committee assists the Chief Executive in fulfilling these responsibilities. Risk management policies are established to identify and analyse the 15. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND CONTINGENT ASSETS risks faced by the entity, to set limits and controls and to monitor risks. Compliance with The entity has no contingent liabilities or contingent assets as at 30 June 2012. policies is reviewed by the internal auditors on a continuous basis.
104 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 105 7
F I N JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES A Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2012 N C E
(a) Financial instrument categories (c) Liquidity Risk Carrying Amount Liquidity risk is the risk that the entity will be unable to meet its payment obligations when they fall due. The entity continuously manages risk through monitoring future cash flows and maturities planning to ensure Note Category 2012 2011 adequate holding of high quality liquid assets. $’000 $’000 During the current and prior years, there were no defaults or breaches on any loans payable. No assets have been Financial Assets pledged as collateral. The entity’s exposure to liquidity risk is deemed insignificant based on prior periods’ data and Cash and cash equivalents 7 N/A 1,530 1,463 current assessment of risk.
1 Receivables 8 Loans and receivables (at amortised cost) 42 50 The liabilities are recognised for amounts due to be paid in the future for goods or services received, whether or not invoiced. Amounts owing to suppliers (which are unsecured) are settled in accordance with the policy set out in Financial Liabilities TC 11/12. For small suppliers, where specified, payment is made no later than 30 days from the date of receipt of a correctly rendered invoice. For other suppliers, if trade terms are not specified, payment is made no later than the end 2 Payable 11 Financial liabilities measured at amortised cost 351 385 of the month following in which an invoice or statement is received. For small business suppliers, where payment is not made within the specified time period, simple interest must be paid automatically unless an existing contract specifies Notes otherwise. For payments to other suppliers the Head of an authority may automatically pay the supplier simple interest. 1 . Excludes statutory receivables and prepayments (ie not within scope of AASB 7) . 2 . Excludes statutory payables and unearned revenue (ie not within scope of AASB 7) . (d) Market Risk Market risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market prices. The Commission does not have any investments or interest bearing liabilities and therefore has minimal exposure to market risk.
(b) Credit Risk Credit risk arises when there is the possibility of the entity’s debtors defaulting on their contractual obligations, (e) Fair Value compared to carrying amount resulting in a financial loss to the entity. The maximum exposure to credit risk is generally represented by the Financial instruments are recognised at amortised cost, which approximates the fair value because of their short- carrying amount of the financial assets (net of any allowance for impairment). term nature.
Credit risk arises from the financial assets of the entity, including cash, receivables, and authority deposits. No collateral is held by the entity. The entity has not granted any financial guarantees. 19. AFTER BALANCE DATE EVENTS There are no events subsequent to balance date which affect the financial report. Credit risk associated with the entity’s financial assets, other than receivables, is managed through the selection of counterparties and establishment of minimum credit rating standards. End of audited Financial Statements Cash Cash comprises cash on hand and bank balances within the NSW Treasury Banking System. Interest is earned on daily bank balances at the monthly average NSW Treasury Corporation (TCorp) 11am unofficial cash rate, adjusted for a management fee to NSW Treasury. This rate was 3.44 per cent at 30 June 2012 (4.65 per cent at 30 June 2011).
Receivables — Trade Debtors All trade debtors are recognised as amounts receivable at balance date. Collectability of trade debtors is reviewed on an ongoing basis. Procedures as established in the Treasurer’s Directions are followed to recover outstanding amounts, including letters of demand. Debts which are known to be uncollectible are written off. An allowance for impairment is raised when there is objective evidence that the entity will not be able to collect all amounts due. This evidence includes past experience, and current and expected changes in economic conditions and debtor credit ratings. No interest is earned on trade debtors. Sales are made on 30 days terms.
The entity is not materially exposed to concentrations of credit risk to a single trade debtor or group of debtors. Based on past experience, debtors that are not past due (2012: $2,902; 2011: $11,000) or are less than three months past due (2012: $0; 2011: $0) are not considered impaired and together these represent 100% of the total trade debtors.
106 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Finance 107 A P P E N Appendices contents Appendix 1 D Complaints against judicial officers: guidelines I X Appendix 1. Complaints against judicial officers: guidelines ...... 109 1. Overview 3. Making a complaint 4.2 Allegations of corruption against The objective of the Commission’s 3.1 Who can make a complaint? a judicial officer are required to be 1 referred by the Judicial Commission Appendix 2. Conduct Division: guidelines for examination of complaints . 111 complaint function is to ensure that A complaint may be made to the complaints about the ability and Commission by any person or may to the Independent Commission behaviour of judicial officers are be referred to the Commission by the Against Corruption for investigation Appendix 3. Continuing judicial education policy ...... 113 investigated in a timely and effective Attorney General. by that body. manner in order to: 3.2 Legislative requirements Appendix 4. Committees ...... 114 a) enhance public confidence in the 5. Investigating a complaint The Judicial Officers Act requires judiciary of NSW, and 5.1 Receipt of a complaint that a complaint is in writing and Appendix 5. Conference topics ...... 115 b) promote good practices and high On receiving a complaint, the that it identifies the complainant standards of judicial performance. Commission will conduct a and the judicial officer concerned. Appendix 6. Judicial education seminars, workshops and field trips . . . 118 preliminary examination into the The Judicial Officers Regulation The Judicial Officers Act 1986 provides matter. In every case, the judicial 2006 requires that particulars of a a means for people to complain about officer is advised of the fact that Appendix 7. Articles published by the Judicial Commission ...... 118 complaint are verified by statutory the conduct of a judicial officer and to a complaint has been made and declaration and that the complaint have those complaints examined by an provided with a copy of the complaint Appendix 8. Publications list ...... 119 is lodged with the Chief Executive of independent body. An important role of documentation. the Commission is not only to receive the Commission. Appendix 9. Ngara Yura program ...... 120 and examine complaints made against 5.2 Preliminary examination 3.3 Assistance to complainants judicial officers, but to determine which The preliminary examination of all If a person cannot write, he or she complaints require further action. complaints must be undertaken Appendix 10. Assistance to other jurisdictions and organisations . . . . 121 may contact the Commission and by Commission members at a assistance will be provided to put the These guidelines are designed to properly constituted meeting of Appendix 11. Working with other organisations ...... 121 complaint in writing. If interpreting or assist people to understand the the Commission. The quorum for a translation assistance from another Commission’s complaint function, meeting is seven members, of whom Appendix 12. Visitors to the Commission ...... 122 language to English is required, the including the principles and at least one must be an appointed Commission will make arrangements. procedures adopted by the Judicial member.1 The Commission cannot Appendix 13. Overseas visits ...... 122 Commission. The detailed provisions 3.4 Advice to the public delegate the preliminary examination of the complaint function are in Part 6 The Commission provides further of a complaint except to a committee, of the legislation. Appendix 14. Exchange of information ...... 123 advice to the public about the which must consist entirely of complaints process through: members and include at least one Appendix 15. Presentations by Commission officers ...... 124 2. Who is a judicial officer? • its website which provides an appointed member. 2.1 A “judicial officer” under the Judicial easy to understand guide to The initial investigation will often Appendix 16. Access to government information ...... 125 Officers Act means: the Commission’s complaints involve an examination of transcripts, • a judge or associate judge of the process, detailed information sound recordings, judgments, court Supreme Court about possible outcomes of Appendix 17. Other compliance matters ...... 127 files and other relevant material. It • a member (including a judicial complaints, and a complaints may also involve taking statements member) of the Industrial form for downloading Glossary ...... 127 from relevant persons. If necessary, a Relations Commission • a plain English brochure outlining response to the complaint is sought Index ...... 128 • a judge of the Land and the complaints process from the judicial officer. Environment Court • assistance to potential GRI index ...... 130 • a judge of the District Court complainants with translation and 5.3 Confidentiality • the president of the Children’s interpreting services The preliminary examination of a complaint by the Commission will be Court • responding to telephone and Five-year overview ...... inside back cover conducted, as far as practicable, on • a magistrate, or face-to-face enquiries, and a confidential basis. The legislative • giving talks on the complaints • the president of the requirement of confidentiality protects process to interested groups. Administrative Decisions Tribunal. the judiciary from unjust criticism 2.2 The definition of “judicial officer” 3.5 Acknowledge receipt of complaints and protects those who furnish includes acting appointments to a All complaints submitted to the information to the Commission in judicial office but does not include Commission in proper form will be the course of its examination of a arbitrators, registrars, chamber acknowledged in writing within one complaint. week of receipt. registrars, assessors, members of The proceedings of the Commission tribunals or legal representatives. and all information and materials, 4. Complaints not within the written or oral, obtained by the 2.3 The Commission has no power to Commission’s jurisdiction Commission in the course of examine complaints against federal 4.1 The Commission does not review a its preliminary examination are judicial officers or a person who is no case for judicial error, mistake, or other confidential. longer a judicial officer. legal ground. Reviews of those matters are the function of appellate courts.
1 Appointed members are persons appointed by the Governor on the nomination of the Minister and who, in the opinion of the Minister, have high standing in the community.
108 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 1 — Complaints against judicial officers: guidelines 109 A P P E N Appendix 1: Complaints against judicial officers: guidelines continued D I X 5.4 Time standards for finalisation of 8.2 Where a complaint is summarily 10. Reference to the Conduct 11.5 Medical or psychological examination about the judicial officer. In doing 13.2 Report to the head of jurisdiction investigations dismissed the Commission will, Division Where the Conduct Division is of the so the Conduct Division has the If the Division forms an opinion that the 2 The Commission aims to finalise the as soon as practicable after its 10.1 Where a complaint has not been opinion that a judicial officer about functions, protections and immunities matter is wholly or partly substantiated investigation of 90% of complaints determination is made, inform the dismissed following the preliminary whom a complaint has been made conferred by the Royal Commissions but does not justify parliamentary within six months of receipt and complainant in writing and provide the examination by the Commission, and may be physically or mentally unfit to Act 1923 on commissioners consideration of the removal of the 100% within 12 months of receipt. reasons for dismissing the complaint. has not been referred to the head of exercise efficiently the functions of a appointed under that Act. The Royal judicial officer complained about from This will include a reference to the jurisdiction, it must be referred to the judicial office, it may request the officer Commissions Act applies to any office, it must send a report to the 6. Complaints against a judicial relevant provisions of the legislation Conduct Division. to undergo a medical or psychological witness summoned by or appearing relevant head of jurisdiction setting out member of the Commission that have been applied in the handling examination (section 34). before the Conduct Division. its conclusions. The report may also 10.2 The function of a Conduct Division is and determination of the complaint. include recommendations as to what A judicial member of the Commission to examine and deal with a particular The judicial officer will also be advised 12. Hearings by the Conduct Division 13. Reports of the Conduct Division steps might be taken to deal with the will not participate in any discussions complaint that has been referred to it in writing of the Commission’s complaint. A copy of this report is also or decisions involving complaints by the Commission. 12.1 The legislation provides that the 13.1 Report to Governor and others against him or her. determination. Conduct Division may hold hearings If the Division has formed an provided to the judicial officer and the 10.3 A Conduct Division is constituted by in relation to a complaint and that a opinion that the matter could justify Commission. 8.3 Many of the complaints that are a panel of two judicial officers (one hearing may be held in public or in parliamentary consideration of 7. Action following preliminary dismissed by the Commission, of whom may be a retired judicial private, as the Conduct Division may the removal of the judicial officer 14. Annual Report examination because they disclose no officer) and one of the two community determine (section 24(2)). complained about from office, it The Judicial Officers Act 1986 requires Following its preliminary examination, misconduct, are nonetheless helpful representatives nominated by must present to the Governor a that certain information, including the Commission must take one of the in the improvement of the judicial 12.2 Release of information Parliament. The membership of the report setting out its findings of statistics and information about following actions: system. The feedback from the The Conduct Division has power to Conduct Division will be determined fact and that opinion. A copy of the complaints disposed of during the • summarily dismiss the complaint examination of complaints has give directions preventing the public by the Commission. The Commission report must also be furnished to the year, be reported to Parliament. This • refer the complaint to the relevant provided valuable information for will also appoint one member of the disclosure of evidence given at its Commission, the Attorney General information appears in the Annual head of jurisdiction, or the further development of judicial Conduct Division as Chairperson. hearings (section 36(1)). and to the complainant. The copy to Report of the Commission. The Report • refer the complaint to the education programs conducted by 10.4 Where a complaint is referred to the the complainant is provided only after is available in hard copy from the Conduct Division. the Commission. 12.3 Royal Commissions Act 1923 Conduct Division the Commission The function of the Conduct Division it has been laid before each House of Commission or can be found on its The Commission will act in 8.4 The Commission may declare a person will, as soon as practicable after is to inquire further into the complaint Parliament. website (www.judcom.nsw.gov.au). accordance with the principles of to be a vexatious complainant, if the the decision is made, advise the natural justice in conducting its person habitually and persistently, complainant and the judicial officer examination of a complaint. Before and mischievously or without of the action taken. The Commission referring a matter to the head of any reasonable grounds, makes will also advise the Attorney General jurisdiction or the Conduct Division, complaints. This section applies of its decision and, in each case, Appendix 2 the Commission provides the judicial whether the complaints are about the request the appointment of a legal Conduct Division: guidelines for examination of complaints officer with an opportunity to respond same or different judicial officers. practitioner or practitioners to assist to the complaint and to present the Conduct Division as counsel. The Commission may disregard any additional information that may assist 1. Introduction may either refer the complaint to the request the appointment of a legal complaint made by the person while 11. Examination of a complaint by the the Commission in its investigation These guidelines have been formulated relevant head of jurisdiction (section practitioner or practitioners to assist the declaration is in force. Conduct Division into the matter. by the Judicial Commission to assist 21(2)) or refer the matter to a Conduct the Conduct Division as counsel. 11.1 The Conduct Division must conduct Division. 9. Reference to a head of a Conduct Division in the exercise 8. Summary dismissal an examination of the complaint of its function in the examination of 3. Referrals under Part 6A — jurisdiction referred to it (section 23). 2.2 The function of a Conduct Division 8.1 A complaint must be summarily complaints against judicial officers. Suspected impairment of judicial 9.1 Where a complaint has not been is to examine and investigate a dismissed if one or more of the 11.2 In conducting the initial examination officers dismissed following the preliminary The Conduct Division is not a standing particular complaint that has been grounds under section 20(1) of the or investigation of a complaint The Conduct Division has the examination by the Commission, body but is appointed by the Judicial referred to it by the Commission. Act exist, whether or not it appears to referred to it by the Commission the same functions in relation to the but in its opinion it does not justify Commission when a particular be substantiated. These grounds are: legislation requires that, as far as examination of a matter referred to reference to the Conduct Division, the complaint or reference under Part 6A of 2.3 A Conduct Division is constituted by • the complaint is one that the practicable, this will take place in it under Part 6A of the Act as it has Commission may refer the matter to the Act is referred to it for examination. a panel of two judicial officers (one Commission is required not to private (section 23(3)). in relation to the examination of a the relevant head of jurisdiction. of whom may be a retired judicial deal with complaint (section 39F(2)). 11.3 Meetings of the Conduct Division The relevant provisions of the officer) and one of the two community • the complaint is frivolous, 9.2 The Commission will notify the head The initial examination of a complaint legislation relating to the Conduct representatives nominated by vexatious or not in good faith of jurisdiction in writing of its decision will involve the members of the Division are contained in Division 3 Parliament. The membership of the 4. Examination of complaint by the • the subject matter of the and will formally refer the matter, Conduct Division and may include of Part 6 and Part 6A of the Judicial Conduct Division will be determined Conduct Division complaint is trivial including all relevant material, for counsel assisting in its meetings. As Officers Act 1986. These include: by the Commission. The Commission 4.1 The Conduct Division must conduct • the matter complained about attention. part of this initial process a venue and (a) the constitution of a Conduct will also appoint one member of the an examination of the complaint Division Conduct Division as Chairperson. referred to it (section 23). occurred at too remote a time to 9.3 In referring a complaint to the head timetable for the investigation will be determined. (b) the examination of complaints justify further consideration of jurisdiction the Commission may 2.4 A formal instrument of delegation 4.2 In conducting the initial examination (c) hearings by the Conduct Division • the complaint is about a judicial include recommendations as to what 11.4 Preliminary matters appointing a Conduct Division or investigation of a complaint decision, or other judicial steps might be taken to deal with the Preliminary matters necessary prior (d) powers of the Conduct Division, (including the Chairperson) will be referred to it by the Commission the function, that is or was subject to complaint, such as counselling by the to the commencement of a hearing, and executed by the members of the legislation requires, that as far as a right of appeal or right to apply head of jurisdiction. including: (e) reports. Commission. practicable, this will take place in for judicial review • interviewing the complainant and private (section 23(3)). 9.4 Where a complaint is referred to • the person who is the subject other potential witnesses 2. Referral of complaints to the 2.5 Where a complaint is referred to a the relevant head of jurisdiction 4.3 Meetings of the Conduct Division of the complaint is no longer a • taking statements Conduct Division Conduct Division the Commission the Commission will, as soon as will, as soon as practicable after The initial examination of a complaint judicial officer, or • gathering documents and other 2.1 Following the preliminary examination practicable after the decision is that decision is made, advise the will involve the members of the • in all the circumstances further material, and of a complaint by the Judicial made, advise the complainant and complainant and the judicial officer Conduct Division and may include consideration of the complaint is • preparing a brief of evidence Commission, if the complaint is not judicial officer of the action taken. of the action taken. The Commission counsel assisting in its meetings. As unnecessary or unjustifiable. summarily dismissed under one or will be undertaken by counsel will also advise the Attorney General part of this initial process a venue more of the grounds under section assisting the Division. This will be of its decision and, in each case, and timetable for the investigation will 20(1) of the Act, the Commission under the direction of the Division. be determined.
110 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 2 — Conduct division: guidelines for examination of complaints 111 A P P E N Appendix 2: Conduct Division: guidelines for examination of complaints continued Appendix 3 D Continuing judicial education policy I X 4.4 Minutes (e) would public confidence in the 6.2 The judicial officer being complained Guiding principles These services may include: The Education Committees of each court, The legislation requires that the authority of the judiciary be about will in most instances appear Pursuant to section 9(1) of the Judicial 1. inducting new appointees with subject to the head of jurisdiction, shall 3 Conduct Division will keep full and undermined by a public or private at the hearing and be represented by Officers Act 1986 the Judicial Commission comprehensive training and orientation have responsibility to develop and manage accurate minutes of the proceedings hearing? senior and junior counsel and a solicitor. may organise and supervise an appropriate 2. updating all judicial officers on the program of educational activities of each meeting of the Division (f) is it necessary to close a hearing Funding of the legal representation is scheme for the induction, orientation important recent changes in law, conducted by each court. (clause 5, Schedule 3, Judicial subject to approval by the Attorney and continuing education and training of procedure and practice to protect the reputation of a The staff of the Commission have the Officers Act 1986). General. judicial officers. The purpose of continuing judicial officer from untested or 3. producing bench books for each court, responsibility to advise and assist each unverified evidence? professional development for judicial with a process for regular updating 4.5 Preliminary matters 6.3 The Conduct Division may also give officers is to: of the above bodies, and to act on their 4. publishing the Judicial Officers’ Bulletin instruction to administer and implement the Preliminary matters necessary prior 5.2 Persons who may be present at permission for other people including a • enhance their professional expertise to the commencement of a hearing, complainant to appear at the hearing and on a regular basis to inform judicial continuing judicial education program. private hearings • facilitate development of their judicial officers of current law and to promote including: If a hearing or part of a hearing is to have legal representation. knowledge and skills, and • interviewing the complainant and the consideration of important judicial Evaluation take place in private, the Conduct 6.4 The right to legal representation for • promote the pursuit of juristic issues other potential witnesses Division may determine the persons The Commission will evaluate the persons appearing at a hearing of the excellence. 5. promoting the development of an • taking statements who may be present. As a general effectiveness of its program of continuing Conduct Division is a matter for the improved scheme for indexing and • gathering documents and other guide these may include: National standard for judicial professional judicial education activities in order to: discretion of the Division. Consistent with accessing important judgments • ensure that it provides useful assistance material, and (a) the judicial officer complained development procedural fairness, the Commission is 6. facilitating continuing judicial education and benefits to judicial officers in the • preparing a brief of evidence, about A national standard or benchmark for the of the view, that as a general guide and through the exchange of experience and performance of judicial duties, and amount of time that should be available for (b) the legal representatives of the wherever it is practicable to do so, the discussion of topical issues, convening will be undertaken by counsel each member of the Australian judiciary • provide feedback to presenters to judicial officer Conduct Division should consent to legal meetings and discussion groups, and assisting the Division. This will be for professional development has been ensure their sessions meet the needs of (c) counsel assisting the Conduct representation for persons appearing at publishing articles and other papers under the direction of the Division. developed by the National Judicial College judicial officers. Division its hearings. of Australia and endorsed by the Council 7. providing refresher services to meet the 4.6 Medical or psychological examination Feedback from judicial officers based on (d) support staff assisting the of Chief Justices of Australia, chief judges, needs of judicial officers Where the Conduct Division is of the 6.5 In exercising its discretion to consent to specified learning objectives is desirable for Conduct Division chief magistrates, the Judicial Conference 8. providing special education services opinion that a judicial officer about legal representation, the main criteria the each educational activity. Input requested (e) any person referred to in of Australia, the Association of Australian to meet the needs of isolated judicial Division should consider include: will include: whom a complaint has been made section 24(6)(b) and their legal Magistrates, and judicial education bodies officers both in the suburbs and a) is the witness incapable of • whether or not the learning objectives may be physically or mentally unfit to representatives, and throughout Australia: country, and on circuit/rotation; exercise efficiently the functions of a representing him or herself? are met (f) witnesses including expert specifically relating to improved access judicial officer, it may request the officer b) is the matter likely to affect an • the program’s usefulness and relevance witnesses. The standard, which was reviewed in late to legal information to undergo a medical or psychological individual’s rights or interest? 2010, is that each judicial officer should 9. promoting the supply of computer • the appropriateness of the content of examination (section 34). 5.3 Release of information c) would the granting of representation be able to spend at least five days each support facilities and supplying sessions and materials The Conduct Division has power to enhance the fairness of the calendar year participating in professional appropriate training • the delivery 5. Hearings by the Conduct Division give directions preventing the public proceedings? development activities relating to the 10. providing an extended range of • suggest improvements for future The legislation provides that the disclosure of evidence given at its d) would the proceedings be conducted judicial officer’s responsibilities. education services for the assistance programs, and Conduct Division may hold hearings hearings (section 36(1)). with more efficiency and expedition of judicial officers, including • suggestions for themes or topics for This standard need not be met in each in relation to a complaint and that a if representation were or were not interdisciplinary and extra-legal future activities relevant to judicial 5.4 Royal Commissions Act 1923 year but can be met on the basis of hearing may be held in public or in granted? courses, where appropriate. The officers. The function of the Conduct Division professional development activities private, as the Conduct Division may e) would the cost of the Inquiry be delivery of this scheme should integrate is to inquire further into the complaint engaged in over a period of three years. determine (section 24(2)). reduced if representation were conference, publication and computer about the judicial officer. In doing granted? This standard can be met, in part, by support services, in order to facilitate 5.1 Public or private hearings so the Conduct Division has the the access to and the use of education If the Conduct Division decides to self-directed professional development. functions, protections and immunities services in an effective and convenient conduct hearings into a complaint, it conferred by the Royal Commissions 7. Reports Judicial officers should be released manner for judicial officers has to consider whether the hearings Act 1923 on commissioners 7.1 Report to Governor and others from court duties to enable them to 11. promoting and conducting the research should be held in public or private or appointed under that Act. The Royal If the Division has formed an opinion that meet this standard. However, judicial and development of educational both. Commissions Act applies to any the matter could justify parliamentary officers should commit some private practices to enhance the effectiveness witness summoned by or appearing consideration of the removal of the judicial time to meet the standard. In exercising its discretion in relation of continuing judicial education. before the Conduct Division. officer complained about from office, it to hearings and as to whether must present to the Governor a report hearings should be held in public 5.5 Record of proceedings Roles and responsibilities setting out its findings of fact and that Services or in private or partly in public and A transcript of proceedings should The Judicial Commission has ultimate opinion. A copy of the report must also be The Commission is sensitive to the need partly in private, the main criteria the be made and kept whenever the responsibility to define its policy and furnished to the Commission, the Attorney to provide a range of education services to Division should consider include: Conduct Division meets as a body strategies in relation to the provision of the General and the complainant. The copy meet the differing needs of each court and (a) is it in the public interest to hold above-mentioned services and to determine to receive evidence, hear testimony, to the complainant is provided only after individual judicial officers. the hearing or part of the hearing the direction and the priority of all activity or hear the arguments of counsel it has been laid before each House of in public or in private? The scheme of continuing judicial education undertaken in the name of the Commission. regarding matters before the Division. Parliament. should be structured to be of benefit to (b) does the type of allegation The Standing Advisory Committee on all judicial officers in each jurisdiction and under consideration (eg ability, 6. Legal representation before the 7.2 Report to the head of jurisdiction Judicial Education (which comprises the to address the differing needs of judicial behaviour, delay, impairment) Conduct Division If the Division forms an opinion that the chairpersons of the Education Committees officers throughout the duration of their require confidential treatment? 6.1 The Attorney General will appoint a matter is wholly or partly substantiated of each of the State’s courts, or their careers. (c) is it desirable, because of the legal practitioner or practitioners to but does not justify parliamentary representatives) has responsibility to confidential nature of any evidence assist the Conduct Division and to consideration of the removal of the Specifically, the education program should advise the Commission on matters of or matter, to hold a hearing or part present the case against the judicial judicial officer complained about from apply the Commission’s resources in the continuing judicial education, to implement of a hearing in private? officer. This assistance is provided office, it must send a report to the most effective delivery of services defined by Commission policy and strategy and, (d) is there a need to protect a by senior and junior counsel and a relevant head of jurisdiction setting out content (law, procedure, management and where appropriate and as requested, to person who provides information solicitor (usually the Crown Solicitor). its conclusions. The report may also administration, and judicial skills) and level co-ordinate the activities of the respective to the Conduct Division as part of include recommendations as to what of application (induction, update, experience Education Committees of each court. its investigation? steps might be taken to deal with the exchange, specialisation and refresher). complaint. A copy of this report is also provided to the judicial officer and the Commission.
112 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 3 — Continuing judicial education policy 113 A P P E N Appendix 4 Appendix 4: Committees continued D Committees I X Education Committees Land and Environment Court Education • Professor M Davis, Director, Indigenous Audit and Risk Management Committee • Mr Alex Smith AM, appointed 1 July 2009 • Mr Murali Sagi PSM, Director, Education Committees for each court meet Committee Law Centre, Faculty of Law, UNSW • Mr Peter Whitehead BA LLB TEP, for two years and renewed on 1 July 2012 Information Management and 5 on a regular basis to discuss: • The Honourable Justice Pain • Mr E Schmatt PSM, Chief Executive, appointed 31 July 2008, renewed 1 July for two years. Mr Smith is the former Corporate Services, Judicial • content and design of judicial education • The Honourable Justice Biscoe (Chair) Judicial Commission of NSW 2011 for two years. Mr Whitehead is the Deputy Director General, Department of Commission. Mr Sagi’s qualifications Premier and Cabinet, NSW and has had and biography are found on p 65. programs • Commissioner L Pearson • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, National Manager Fiduciary Solutions, 40 years’ experience in the NSW public • evaluation results of judicial education Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) Perpetual and until 30 June 2009 was • Ms J Gray, Registrar, Land and sector having held senior positions in programs, and • Mrs T Wright, Aboriginal Project Officer, the NSW Public Trustee. Environment Court (until September the Department of Premier and Cabinet Judicial Commission of NSW • recommendations for change. 2011) and the Department of Land and Water • Ms L Walton, Acting Registrar, Land and The Standing Advisory Committee on Judicial Bench Book Committees Conservation. Environment Court (from November 2011) Education comprises the chairpersons of the The day-to-day work of revising the content Education Committees of each of the State’s • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, of bench books is delegated to individual courts or their representatives. It advises the Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) Bench Book Committees, acting on behalf Appendix 5 Commission on matters of continuing judicial of the Commission. education, implements Commission policy District Court Education Committee Conference topics and strategy, and, where appropriate and as • Her Honour Judge Sidis (until April Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book Committee requested, co-ordinates the activities of the 2012) • The Honourable Rod Howie QC (Chair) Annual Conferences • “Fair Work Australia — a ‘Q & A’”, • “Criminal Law Update”, The Education Committees. • Her Honour Judge Ashford (Chair) • The Honourable Justice Johnson Dr Shae McCrystal, Senior Lecturer, Honourable Justice Peter Johnson, • The Honourable Justice Latham The Education Director, Ms Ruth Windeler, • His Honour Judge Woods QC Supreme Court Annual Conference, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney; Supreme Court of NSW • Her Honour Judge Hock • The Honourable Justice RAH Hulme August 2011 convenes Education Committee and Standing Mr Nigel Ward, CEO and Director, • “Mediation and Conciliation: Skills and • His Honour Judge Lakatos SC Advisory Committee meetings, and provides • His Honour Judge Nicholson SC (until • “Keynote Address: Occam’s Razor Australian Business Lawyers and Process Review and Update”, professional input to the committees. June 2012) • Mr H Donnelly (Convenor) and the Law”, The Right Honourable Advisors and Mr Alex Bukarica, National Her Honour Magistrate Sue Duncombe, • His Honour Judge Berman SC Lord Justice Stanley Burnton, Court of Legal Officer, CFMEU Mining and Civil Trials Bench Book Committee Local Court of NSW Standing Advisory Committee on • His Honour Judge Zahra SC Appeal of England and Wales Energy Division • The Honourable James Wood AO QC • “The Origins of the Mining Warden’s Judicial Education • “Judicial Review Post Kirk”, • “The Prospects of Carbon Pricing”, • His Honour Judge Lakatos SC (Chair) Court”, The Honourable John Hamilton • The Honourable Justice Basten, Mr Stephen Gageler SC, Solicitor Mr Russell Skelton, Chief Executive, • His Honour Judge Elkaim SC • The Honourable Michael Campbell QC QC, Former Judge of the Supreme Supreme Court (Chair) General of Australia Macquarie Generation Court of NSW • Her Honour Judge Wells SC • The Honourable Justice Garling RFD • The Honourable Justice Walton, • “Developments in Criminal Trials”, The • “Interpreters in Court”, Her Honour • “Environmental Law in the High Court”, • Mr C Smith, Judicial Registrar • His Honour Judge Johnstone Industrial Relations Commission Honourable Justice Robert A Hulme Magistrate Daphne Kok, Local Court of Mr Stephen Gageler SC, Solicitor • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, (until 8 March 2012) • The Honourable Justice Biscoe, Land • “Equity Session: A Property Travelogue NSW and Associate Professor Ludmila General of Australia Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) • His Honour Judge Elkaim SC and Environment Court or ‘The Academic as Tour Guide’”, Stern, Head of School of Languages • “Exclusionary Rules of Evidence”, • His Honour Magistrate Townsden (from Professor Peter Butt, Sydney Law and Linguistics, University of NSW • His Honour Judge Nicholson SC, Local Court Education Committee The Honourable Justice Jayne Jagot, District Court (until June 2012) 8 March 2012) School, University of Sydney • “Eyewitness Memory”, Dr Richard Kemp, • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate Federal Court of Australia • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate • Mr E Schmatt PSM • “Public Access to Courts and Senior Lecturer in Forensic Psychology, Mottley • “Rationalising State and Culver, Local Court • Ms R Windeler Information”, The Honourable Justice School of Psychology, University of • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate Commonwealth Environmental Law, • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, • Ms F Findlay (Convenor from Megan Latham, The Honourable Justice NSW and Dr Helen Paterson, Lecturer Culver (Chair) Dr Melissa Perry QC, Barrister Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) 16 January 2012) Nigel Rein and Her Honour Judge in Forensic Psychology, School of • “Catastrophic Climate Risks and • His Honour Magistrate Dr Brown RFD Helen Murrell SC Psychology, The University of Sydney • Ms Antonia Lomny (Convenor until Disaster Law”, Professor Rosemary • His Honour Magistrate Dunlevy • “The Ngara Yura Program”, The • “The Role of the United Nations Internal Supreme Court Education Committee 16 January 2012 ) Lyster, Professor of Climate and • Her Honour Magistrate Freund Honourable Justice Stephen Justice Council, United Nations Appeal • The Honourable Justice Beazley AO Environmental Law, Sydney Law • His Honour Magistrate Grogin (from Local Court Bench Book Committee Rothman AM Tribunal and the United Nations Dispute (from November 2011) School, University of Sydney February 2012) • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate • “The Fiduciary Business”, Professor Tribunal”, The Honourable Justice • The Honourable Justice Basten (Chair) • “Environmental Law and the Rule • His Honour Magistrate Guy Mottley Don Langevoort, Thomas Aquinas Michael Adams, Supreme Court of NSW • The Honourable Justice Campbell of Law”, The Honourable Dr Kevin • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate Reynolds Professor of Law, • “The Appellate Jurisdiction of the • The Honourable Justice Hoeben AM RFD • His Honour Magistrate Heilpern Lindgren AM QC, Retired Judge of the Culver (from 26 July 2011) Georgetown University Court”, The Honourable Justice Roger • The Honourable Justice Nicholas • Her Honour Magistrate Huber Federal Court • His Honour Magistrate Lerve (until • Her Honour Magistrate Baptie • “Preventing Cancer in the 21st Boland, President • The Honourable Justice Hislop (from 7 November 2011) February 2012) Century”, Professor Ian Frazer, CEO • “Workload and Case Management District Court Annual Conference, • The Honourable Justice Johnson • Ms A Passe De Silva, Policy Officer • His Honour Magistrate Mabbutt (from and Research Director, Translational Update and New Directions in April 2012 • The Honourable Justice Harrison • Ms Roslyn Cook (Convenor) Research Institute, Brisbane Industrial/Employment Law: Everything February 2012) • “Court of Appeal Review”, The • The Honourable Justice Fullerton • “Current Issues in DNA Evidence”, you wanted to know but did not like to • Her Honour Magistrate Schurr (until Equality before the Law Bench Book Honourable Justice Margaret Beazley • The Honourable Justice Schmidt Professor Angela van Daal, Professor ask”, The Honourable Justice Michael February 2012) Committee AO, Supreme Court of NSW • The Honourable Justice Garling RFD of Forensic Science, Faculty of Walton, Vice-President • Her Honour Magistrate Wahlquist (from • The Honourable Justice Beazley AO • “Current Issues in Sentencing”, • Ms L Murphy, Chief Executive Officer Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond February 2012) (Chair) Her Honour Judge Deborah Payne and Principal Registrar University Land and Environment Court Annual • Ms A Passe De Silva, Policy Officer • “Are Courts Self-Serving?”, Dr Simon • The Honourable Justice Basten • “Surviving the Khmer Rouge”, Justice Conference, May 2012 • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, • Ms R Windeler, Education Director Longstaff, Executive Director of • The Honourable Justice Rothman AM Sathavy Kim, Supreme Court of • “Update on Jurisdiction and Practice Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) (Convenor) St James Ethics Centre, Sydney • His Honour Judge Norrish QC Cambodia and Procedure”, The Honourable Industrial Relations Commission • Dr M Dodson AM Justice Brian Preston, Chief Judge • “Workcover Prosecutions”, Education Committee Ngara Yura Committee Industrial Relations Commission Annual The Honourable Justice Stephen • Dr J Cashmore AO • “Easements and Covenants: A Grand • The Honourable Justice Kavanagh • The Honourable Justice Rothman AM Conference, October 2011 Rothman AM, Supreme Court of NSW • Mr E Schmatt PSM Tour in Words and Pictures”, Emeritus (Chair) (until June 2012) • The Honourable Justice Pepper (from • “The Hunter in Perspective: • “Court of Criminal Appeal Review”, The • Ms R Windeler Professor Peter Butt, University of • The Honourable Justice Haylen March 2012) Consultation and Co-operation”, Sydney Honourable Justice Robert A Hulme • Ms K Lumley (Convenor) Ms Karen Howard, Director, NSW • Commissioner P Connor (until January • His Honour Judge Norrish QC (Chair) • “Expert Conferences and Reports and • “Buildings”, Her Honour Judge Elizabeth Business Chamber, Chairwoman, 2012) • His Honour Judge Nicholson SC (until Sexual Assault Handbook Committee Concurrent Evidence in the Supreme Olsson SC GP Access and Director, Hunter • Commissioner I Tabbaa AM June 2012) Court”, The Honourable Justice Peter • “Medical Tribunals”, Her Honour Judge • His Honour Judge Ellis (Chair) Development Council and Mr Gary • Mr M Grimson, Industrial Registrar, • Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate Garling RFD, Supreme Court of NSW Audrey Balla • His Honour Judge Knox SC Kennedy, Secretary, Newcastle Trades Industrial Relations Commission Mottley • “Impartiality and Disqualification”, • Ms R Windeler Hall Council • “Setting the Use-by Date for • His Honour Magistrate Dick Her Honour Judge Dianne Truss • Ms R Windeler, Education Director, • Ms P Buckland (Convenor from Jurisdictional Error”, The Honourable Judicial Commission of NSW (Convenor) • Mr T Chenery, Chief Executive Officer, 30 November 2011) Justice John Basten, NSW Court of Hunter Aboriginal Children’s Services Appeal
114 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 5 — Conference topics 115 A P P E N Appendix 5: Conference topics 2011–12 continued D I X • “Problem Gambling and its Relationship to • “Therapeutic Justice and Intervention • “Education Act”, Ms Jenni Pendergast, • “Custody and Alternatives”, Dr Tom • “Time Management for Judges”, The • “Time Management for Judges”, Offending”, Mr Anthony Sobb, Chairman Programs”, Her Honour Magistrate Legal Officer; Mr Daniel McVey, Calma, National Coordinator for Tackling Honourable Justice Steven Rares, Mr Ron Laurie, Integral Development 5 and Founder, Oakdene House Foundation Teresa O’Sullivan Senior Legal Officer and Ms Debbie Indigenous Smoking; Mr Peter Townsend, Federal Court of Australia and Professor (Victoria) and Mr Tom Simpson, Education Officer, • “Standard Civil Motions”, His Honour Robinson, Student Services Officer Manager Indigenous Classifications, Ron Cacioppe, University of Western • “Sentencing”, Professor Geraldine Oakdene House Foundation Magistrate Antony Townsden (Southern) from the Department of Education and Corrective Services NSW and Mr Luke Australia and Managing Director, Integral Mackenzie, Faculty of Law, Bond • “Intensive Correction Orders 12 Months and Her Honour Magistrate Jennifer Communities and Ms Rachel Dart, Grant, Assistant Commissioner, Offender Development University QLD and The Honourable On”, Ms Rosemary Caruana, Assistant Atkinson (Northern) Solicitor in Charge – Care and Protection, Services and Programs, Corrective • “Sentencing”, Professor Arie Freiberg, Terry Buddin SC Commissioner, Community Offender • “Coronial Session”, His Honour Legal Aid NSW Services NSW Dean, Faculty of Law, Monash University • “Wrap up Session”, Ms Ruth Windeler, Management, Corrective Services NSW Magistrate Scott Mitchell (Southern) • “Bail”, Ms Valda Rusis, Deputy Chief • “Pre and Post Release Issues”, Mr Shane and The Honourable Terry Buddin, Judicial Commission of NSW and The • “Q & A: Everything you wanted to know and His Honour Magistrate Hugh Dillon Executive, Juvenile Justice and Ms Lydia Phillips, Chairman and Chief Executive Supreme Court of NSW Honourable Justice Debra Mullins, but did not like to ask”, The Honourable (Northern) Hamilton, Manager, Bail Assistance Line, Officer, Tribal Warrior Association; Supreme Court of Queensland National Judicial Orientation Program, Justice Reg Blanch AM, Chief Judge, Juvenile Justice NSW Superintendent Luke Freudenstein, • “Common Defences”, His Honour May 2012 His Honour Judge Ron Solomon, Her Magistrate Geoffrey Dunlevy • “PCYC”, Senior Sergeant Elliot, Zone Redfern LAC; Mr Shaun Grace, Manager Magistrates’ Orientation Program, Balund-a Residential Program, Corrective (joint program with NJCA and AIJA) Honour Judge Dianne Truss and His • “Discretionary and Mandatory Commander, Youth Command, NSW August 2011 Services NSW; Mr Garry Taylor, Aboriginal Honour Judge Peter Berman SC Exclusions: Sections 135–138 of the Police and Senior Constable Williams, • “Familiarisation”, Ms Ruth Windeler, • “Orientation”, Ms Ruth Windeler Artist; Ms Sue Jefferies, Clinical Nurse Evidence Act”, Her Honour Magistrate Youth Case Manager, Youth Command, Judicial Commission of NSW and • “Learning Styles & Learning Consultant, Justice Health, Drug Court Janet Wahlquist NSW Police Ms Jenny Green, National Judicial Preferences”, Ms Ruth Windeler OTHER CONFERENCES of NSW and Mr Albert Ryan, Aboriginal • “Open Forum”, His Honour Judge Mark College of Victoria • “Using AVL in the Courtroom”, His Health Education Officer • “Judicial Attributes”, His Honour Drug Court Practitioners’ Conference, Honour Magistrate John Favretto Marien SC, President, Children’s Court • “Judicial Conduct in and out of Court”, Magistrate David Heilpern December 2011 NSW The Honourable Chief Justice John • “Self-represented Litigants”, • “Pathways to Prison for Mentally Ill ORIENTATION PROGRAMS Children’s Court Section 16 Conference, Doyle AC, Supreme Court of South His Honour Magistrate Ian Guy Offenders”, Dr Eileen Baldry, Professor Ngara Yura “Exchanging Ideas II” Australia and The Honourable Chief August 2011 National Judicial Orientation Program, • “Judicial Attitudes”, His Honour of Criminology, University of New South Conference, 10-11 September 2011 November 2011 Justice Wayne Martin, Supreme Court of • “The Role of the Children’s Guardian”, Magistrate David Heilpern Wales Ms Kerryn Boland, Children’s Guardian • “Acknowledgment of Country”, (joint program with NJCA and AIJA) Western Australia Mrs Tammy Wright, Project Officer, • “Sentencing Principles”, Her Honour • “Development of the Brain”, Professor • “Programs Provided to Juveniles in • “Maintaining Psychological and Physical Ngara Yura Committee • “Familiarisation”, Ms Ruth Windeler, Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Culver Ian Hickie AM, Executive Director, Brain Detention and a Tour of Juniperina Health”, His Honour Chief Judge Judicial Commission of NSW • “Ethical Dilemmas You May Have and Mind Research Institute, University Detention Centre”, Ms Kathryn Tomsett, • “Smoking Ceremony and Didgeridoo”, Michael Rozens AO QC, County Court Encountered”, Her Honour Deputy Chief of Sydney Acting Assistant Manager Client Uncle Max Eulo, Redfern Elder • “Judicial Conduct in and out of Court”, of Victoria; Ms Karen Inge, Dietician, Magistrate Jane Culver • “Treatment Strategies for Aboriginal Services and Ms Lynne Kirkpatrick, • “Official Opening of Conference”, The Honourable Chief Justice John Institute of Health and Fitness Victoria Offenders/Clients and the Effect of Drug Assistant Principal Dr Megan Davis, Professor of Law and Doyle AC, Supreme Court of South and Dr Nigel Prior, Psychiatrist, • “Judicial Practice”, His Honour Australia and The Honourable Chief Wentworth Clinic Queensland Use within the Aboriginal Community”, • “Youth in Out of Home Care”, Mr Chris Director, Indigenous Law Centre, Faculty Magistrate David Heilpern Justice Marilyn Warren AC, Supreme Ms Lena Wotherspoon, Coordinator Brown, Manager Casework Out of Home of Law, UNSW; Expert, United Nations • “Unconscious Judicial Prejudice”, • “Judicial Communication”, Ms Ruth Court of Victoria Aboriginal Assessments and Support, Care, Life Without Barriers Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Dr Mark Nolan, Psychologist, ANU Windeler Corrective Services NSW • “Maintaining Psychological and Physical College of Law; The Honourable Justice • “Legal Developments in the Care • “Keynote Address: Mental Health Issues • “Decision Making/Judgments” His Health”, Ms Karen Inge, Dietician, John Dowsett, Federal Court of Australia • “The Effects of Drug Use and Crime Jurisdiction”, His Honour Judge Mark in Aboriginal Communities — a crooked Honour Magistrate Hugh Dillon on the Vietnamese Community”, Mr pathway to the prison door”, Dr Leanne Institute of Health and Fitness Victoria and The Honourable Justice Debra Marien SC • “Ex Tempore Judgments Workshop”, Thanh Van Nguyen, Drug and Alcohol Craze, Craze Lateral Solutions p/l, based and Dr Nigel Prior, Psychiatrist, Mullins, Supreme Court of Queensland • “Child Development and its Effect on His Honour Magistrate Hugh Dillon Multicultural Education Centre on a paper prepared with Professor Wentworth Clinic Queensland • “Assessing the Credibility of Witnesses”, Criminal Behaviour”, Mr Mark Allerton, John Mendoza, former Chairman of the • “Unconscious Judicial Prejudice”, Professor Neil Brewer, Psychologist, • “Bail”, Her Honour Deputy Chief • “Intensive Supervision and the Director, Children’s Court Clinic Parramatta Drug Court”, Mr Craig National Advisory Council on Mental The Honourable Keith Mason AC QC, Flinders University, South Australia Magistrate Jane Mottley • “Juvenile Justice Bail Supervision Jones, Research Manager, NSW Bureau Health Professorial Fellow, University of NSW and His Honour Judge Michael Boylan, • “Group Sentencing Exercise 1 — Protocol — a Discussion” of Crime Statistics and Research • “Women’s Business”, Ms Rowena • “Assessing the Credibility of Witnesses”, District Court of South Australia Discussion and Comparison”, His Honour • “Creating Compassionate Cultures”, The Lawrie, Therapist Consultant and Professor Neil Brewer, Psychologist, • “Court Craft – The Trial from Hell”, The Magistrate David Heilpern Children’s Court Section 16 Conference, Venerable Thubten Chokyi, Executive Educator, Aboriginal Family Violence and Flinders University, South Australia and Honourable Justice John McKechnie, • “Court Craft in Practice”, Her Honour February 2012 Director, Liberation Prison Project Professor Elena Marchetti, University of The Honourable Justice John McKechnie, Supreme Court of Western Australia and Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Culver, • “Assessment Orders: When are they • “Toxicology”, Mr Peter Bowron, Senior Wollongong Supreme Court of Western Australia The Honourable Justice Alan Wilson, Her Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate going to help?”, Mr Mark Allerton, Hospital Scientist, Toxicology Unit, • “Juveniles”, Mr Anthony McGinness, • “Court Craft – The Trial from Hell”, The Supreme Court Queensland Jane Mottley, His Honour Magistrate Director, Children’s Court Clinic PaLMS Senior Consultant, Noetic Solutions Pty Honourable Justice John Byrne and • “Judgment Writing”, The Honourable David Heilpern, His Honour Magistrate • “Youth Justice Conferencing”, Ltd, Ms Jane Madden, Project & Liaison The Honourable Justice Debra Mullins, Tom Wodak, County Court of Victoria Ian Guy and Ms Ruth Windeler Ms Jenette Duckett, Assistant Manager, Local Court Southern and Northern Officer, and Ms Laurel Russ, Manager, Supreme Court of Queensland (retired) and The Honourable Justice • “Mutual Observation”, Her Honour Youth Justice Conferencing and Regional Conferences, March and May Aboriginal Unit, NSW Ombudsman and • “Judgment Writing”, The Honourable Tom Debra Mullins, Supreme Court of Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Mottley Ms Denise Hanley, Senior Project Officer, 2012 Professor Dianna T Kenny, Professor Wodak, County Court of Victoria (retired) Queensland Youth Justice Conferencing from Juvenile • “Commonwealth Sentencing”, His of Psychology and Music, University of and The Honourable Justice Linda • “Cultural Barriers in the Court Room”, • “Appeals”, His Honour Magistrate Chris Justice Honour Magistrate Ian Guy Sydney Dessau AM, Family Court of Australia Ms Maria Dimopolous, Myriad O’Brien • “Managing Child Witnesses”, Dr Judy • “Parents with Intellectual Disability • “Different Country, Different Crime Rates: • “Cultural Barriers in the Court Room”, Consultants Melbourne • “Cybercrime”, His Honour Magistrate in Care Proceedings”, Dr Margaret Cashmore AO Dr Roger Brown RFD Lessons Learned from Six Aboriginal Ms Maria Dimopolous, Myriad • “Interpreters”, Mr Paul Hellander, Spencer, Intellectual Disability Rights Communities in NSW”, Dr Don • “Computer Tips & Tricks”, Ms Joy Blunt • “Recent Developments in Care and Consultants Melbourne Government Interpreting and Translating Service Weatherburn PSM, Director, NSW • “Group Sentencing Exercise 2 — Criminal Jurisdictions of the Children’s • “Interpreters”, Mr Paul Hellander, Centre, South Australia • “Protecting Aboriginal Children Together Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research Discussion and Comparison”, His Court”, His Honour Judge Mark Marien Government Interpreting and Translating • “Litigants in Person”, The Honourable (PACT)”, Ms Angela Webb, AbSec and Ms Alison Vivian, Senior Researcher, Honour Magistrate David Heilpern and SC, President, Children’s Court of NSW Centre, South Australia Justice Peter Murphy, Family Court of • “Open Forum”, His Honour Judge Mark Jumbunna Indigenous House of His Honour Magistrate Ian Guy • “Business Records”, His Honour • “Litigants in Person”, His Honour Chief Australia and Dr Grant Lester, Victorian Marien SC, President, Children’s Court Learning (Research Unit), University of • “Stress Management”, His Honour Magistrate Dr Roger Brown RFD Judge Terry Worthington, District Court Institute of Forensic Mental Health NSW Technology, Sydney. Magistrate David Heilpern • “Interesting Applications”, Ms Joy Blunt, of South Australia and Dr Grant Lester, • “Court Room Control and • “RCIADIC — Has it made a difference?”, Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health Communication”, His Honour Judge • “Sentencing Exercise 3”, His Honour Systems Officer – Training, Judicial Children’s Court Section 16 Conference, The Honourable Hal Wootten AC QC and Commission of NSW • “Court Room Control and Graham Anderson, County Court of Magistrate David Heilpern and May 2012 The Honourable Geoff Eames AM QC Victoria and His Honour Judge Geoff His Honour Magistrate Ian Guy • “Electronic Self Service (ESS)”, Communication”, His Honour Judge • “Understanding Kinship: Indigenous Graham Anderson, County Court of Muecke, District Court of South Australia • “Everything You Wanted to Know But Ms Karen Willis, HR Manager, People and Law”, Ms Lynette Riley, Victoria and His Honour Judge Geoff Were Afraid to Ask”, Her Honour Deputy Department of Attorney General and Academic Coordinator of the Koori Muecke, District Court of South Australia Chief Magistrate Jane Mottley Justice Centre, University of Sydney
116 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 5 — Conference topics 117 A P P E N Appendix 6 D Judicial education seminars,workshops and field trips I X Supreme Court Seminar Series • “Judgment Writing Workshop for • “Convention on Rights of the Child”, • The Honourable Justice Peter Johnson, • Kate Lumley and His Honour Judge • The Right Honourable Lord Neuberger • “Representative Actions in the Commissioners of the Land and The Honourable Jennifer Boland AM, “Consistency in sentencing for federal Stephen Norrish QC, “Exchanging of Abbotsbury, “Open Justice 8 Supreme Court – The New Part 10 Environment Court of NSW”, Mr Tom Twilight Seminar, 7 March 2012 offences – some issues arising from ideas about Aboriginal contact with the unbound?” (2011) 10(3) TJR 259 of the Civil Procedure Act”, The Wodak, retired judge of the County • “Controlling the Court”, The Honourable parallel or overlapping federal and State criminal justice system” (2011) 23(10) • The Honourable JJ Spigelman AC QC, Honourable Justice John Basten and Court of Victoria; The Honourable Michael Campbell QC, Twilight Seminar, offences” (2012) 24(3) JOB 17 JOB 83 “Judicial mediation in Australia” (2011) The Honourable Acting Justice Ronald Justice Monika Schmidt, Supreme 20 March 2012 • Professor Dianna T Kenny, “Young • The Honourable W Martin, “Future 10(3) TJR 289 Sackville AO QC, Court of Appeal, Court of NSW; His Honour Acting • “Cybercrime”, Mr Matthew Nevin, offenders with an intellectual disability directions in judicial education” (2011) • Professor K Warner, Associate Professor Twilight Seminar, 19 July 2011 Judge Paul Cloran, District Court of Project Manager eCourt and in the criminal justice system” (2012) 10(3) TJR 277 J Davis, His Excellency the Honourable • “Cybercrime, Technology Trends and NSW and Ms Ruth Windeler, Education Prosecution Support, High Tech Crime 24(5) JOB 35 • The Honourable Justice P McClellan P Underwood AC, “The jury experience: Electronic Evidence”, Mr Matthew Director, Judicial Commission of New Operations, Australian Federal Police, AM, “Looking inside the jury room” insights from the Tasmanian jury study” Nevin, Project Manager eCourt and South Wales, 8–9 December 2011 Twilight Seminar, 13 June 2012 (2011) 10(3) TJR 315 (2011) 10(3) TJR 333 Prosecution Support, High Tech Crime • “Mutual Observation, 360 Degree Operations, Australian Federal Police, Feedback and Communication”, His Local Court Twilight Seminar, 27 September 2011 Honour Acting Judge Paul Cloran, • “Civil Law”, His Honour Judge Peter • “Personal Property Securities”, District Court of NSW; Her Honour Johnstone, District Court of NSW, His Mr Robert Newlinds SC, Twilight Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Mottley, Honour Magistrate Antony Townsden Appendix 8 Seminar, 26 October 2011 Local Court of NSW; Her Honour and Her Honour Magistrate Jennifer Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Culver, Publications list • “Australian Consumer Law”, Mr Russell Atkinson, Twilight Seminar, Local Court of NSW and Ms Ruth Miller AM, Chairman Minter Ellison, 21 November 2011 Windeler, Judicial Commission of NSW, Many of the Commission’s publications 12 Judicial views about pre-sentence 33 The impact of the standard non- Senior Fellow, Melbourne Law School, Twilight Seminar, 15 February 2012 are available to download from the reports, 1995 parole period sentencing scheme on The University of Melbourne, Twilight Ngara Yura Program Commission’s website at www.judcom.nsw. • “The Nuts and Bolts of Criminal 13 The Sentencing Act 1989 and its effect sentencing patterns in New South Seminar, 1 May 2012 • “Indigenous Peoples in International gov.au. All Commission publications can be Sanctions”, His Honour Judge Stephen on the size of the prison population, Wales, 2010 Law”, Professor Megan Davis, Expert purchased through the NSW Government’s Norrish QC, District Court of NSW, 1996 34 Sentencing Offenders convicted of Land and Environment Court Series Member, United Nations Permanent online shop at www.shop.nsw.gov.au. Twilight Seminar, 20 June 2012 14 Magistrates’ attitudes to drink-driving, child pornography and child abuse Forum on Indigenous Issues and • “Litigants in Person”, The Honourable drug-driving and speeding, 1997 material offences, 2010 Justice Anna Katzmann, Federal Court Director, Indigenous Law Centre, District Court Seminar Series Education Monographs 15 Child sexual assault, 1997 35 Conviction appeals in NSW, 2011 of Australia, Twilight Seminar, Faculty of Law, The University of New 1 Fragile bastion: Judicial independence • “Blood Alcohol Analysis”, Associate 16 Sentencing disparity and the gender of 36 Sentencing for common offences in the 28 September 2011 South Wales, Twilight Seminar, in the nineties and beyond, 1997 Professor Anthony Moynham, Adjunct 28 March 2012 juvenile offenders, 1997 NSW Children’s Court: 2010, 2012 • “Mental Health Issues”, The Honourable 2 A matter of judgment: Judicial decision- Associate Professor, Sydney Forensic 17 Sentencing disparity and the ethnicity Keith Mason AC QC, Chaiman of making and judgment writing, 2003 Sentencing Trends and Issues Medicine and Science Network, Sydney of juvenile offenders, 1998 Tristan Jepson Memorial Foundation; Field Trips 1 The Children’s Court, March 1991 Medical School, University of Sydney 3 The role of the judge, 2004 Dr Robert Fisher, Head of Department • “Green Building Field Trip to 1 Bligh 18 Periodic detention revisited, 1998 and Inspector John Lipman and Senior 4 Statutory interpretation: Principles and 2 The impact of truth in sentencing: Part 1, of Psychiatry and Psychological Street”, Mr Tony Gulliver, Head of 19 Sentencing drug offenders: Analysis Constable Dave Gardner, Breath pragmatism for a new age, 2007 The higher courts, March 1992 Services, St Vincent’s Private Hospital Development, Dexus Property Group of sentences imposed in the higher Analysis and Research Unit, NSW 3 The impact of truth in sentencing: Part 2, and Mrs Marie Jepson, Director, Tristan and Mr Bruce Jones, Project Manager, courts of New South Wales, 1 January Police, Twilight Seminar, 6 October 2011 The Local Courts, June 1992 Jepson Memorial Foundation, Twilight Grocon Group, Twilight Field Trip, Research monographs 1992–31 December 1997, 1999 • “Defamation”, The Honourable Justice 4 Sentencing in the Court of Criminal Seminar, 9 November 2011 18 April 2012 1 The use of custodial sentences and 20 Apprehended violence orders: A survey Carolyn Simpson, Supreme Court of Appeal, February 1993 alternatives to custody by New South of magistrates, 1999 NSW, Twilight Seminar, 30 November Wales magistrates, 1990 (available only 5 Common offences in the Local Courts, 21 Sentencing dangerous drivers in New 2011 as a photocopy) March 1994 South Wales: Impact of the Jurisic 6 Common offences in the higher courts, 2 Community service orders: Views of guidelines on sentencing practice, 2002 organisers in New South Wales, 1991 July 1994 22 Circle sentencing in New South Wales: 7 Sentencing homicide: The effect of 3 Community service orders and periodic A review and evaluation, 2003 Appendix 7 detention as sentencing options: A legislative changes on the penalty for 23 Sentenced homicides in New South survey of judicial officers in New South murder, June 1994 Articles that we published this year Wales 1994–2001, 2004 Wales, 1991 8 From murder to manslaughter: Partial 24 MERIT — A survey of magistrates, 2004 4 Sentencing juvenile offenders and defences in New South Wales, 1900 to • The Honourable Justice J Allsop, • The Honourable Justice C Croft, • The Right Honourable Dame Sian the Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW): The 25 Sentencing offenders convicted of child 1993 “Continuing judicial education: the “Can Australian courts get their act Elias, “JUSTICE for one half of the sexual assault, 2004 impact of legislative and administrative 9 Common offences in the Children’s Australian experience” (2012) 10(4) TJR together on international commercial human race? Responding to Mary changes in the Children’s Court 26 The nexus between sentencing and Court, May 1995 439 arbitration?” (2011) 10(3) TJR 361 Wollstonecraft’s challenge” (2012) 10(4) rehabilitation in the Children’s Court of 1982–1990, 1991 10 Sentencing drink driver offenders, June • The Right Honourable Lady Justice • Professor Angela van Daal and His TJR 399 NSW, 2005 5 A critical review of periodic detention in 1995 Arden DBE, “Magna Carta and the Honour Judge Andrew Haesler SC, • Professor Sandra Hale and Associate New South Wales, 1992 27 Crown appeals against sentence, 2005 judges: realising the vision” (2012) 10(4) “DNA evidence: current issues and Professor Ludmila Stern, “Interpreter 11 “Sentenced to the rising of the court”, 6 Sentencing drug offenders: Analysis of 28 Partial defences to murder in NSW TJR 419 challenges” (2011) 23(7) JOB 55 quality and working conditions January 1996 sentences imposed in the higher courts 1990-2004, 2006 • Eric Balodis, “Claim of right and its • Hugh Donnelly, “The diminished role comparing Australian and international 12 The use of recognizances, May 1996 of New South Wales, 25 September 29 Full-time imprisonment in New South application to the offence of robbery” of standard non-parole periods” (2012) courts of justice” (2011) 23(9) JOB 75 13 Sentencing deception offenders Part 1, 1989–31 December 1991, 1992 Wales and other jurisdictions: A (2011) 23(11) JOB 97 24(1) JOB 1 • The Honourable Justice JD Heydon AC, The Local Courts, June 1996 7 “Special circumstances” under the national and international comparison, • The Honourable Justice PA Bergin, • His Honour Magistrate GJ Dunlevy, “An “Varieties of judicial method in the late 14 Sentencing deception offenders Part 2, Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW), 1993 2007 “Judicial mediation: problems and economic analysis of the purpose of 20th Century” (2012) 10(4) TJR 375 The higher courts, October 1996 8 Alcohol as a sentencing factor: A survey 30 Sentencing robbery offenders since the solutions” (2011) 10(3) TJR 305 sentencing” (2012) 10(4) TJR 479 • The Honourable Justice Peter 15 Driving causing death: Section 52A of of attitudes of judicial officers, 1994 Henry guideline judgment, 2007 • His Honour Judge Peter Berman SC, • Professor Gary Edmond, “The Johnson, “The Court Suppression the Crimes Act 1900, May 1997 31 Diverting mentally disordered offenders “Question trails in jury instruction – a admissibility of incriminating expert and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 9 Sentence Indication Hearings Pilot 16 An overview of sentence and conviction in the NSW Local Court, 2008 note of caution” (2012) 24(4) JOB 27 opinion evidence in the US, England commences” (2011) 23(6) JOB 45 Scheme, 1994 appeals in the New South Wales Court 32 Achieving consistency and • The Right Honourable Lord Justice SJ and Canada” (2011) 23(8) JOB 67 • The Honourable Justice Peter Johnson, 10 Sentenced homicides in New South of Criminal Appeal, March 1998 transparency in sentencing for Burnton, “Occam’s razor and the law” “Consistency in sentencing for federal Wales 1990–1993, 1995 17 Kidnapping — Section 90A Crimes Act environmental offences, 2008 (2012) 10(4) TJR 455 offences – the work of intermediate 11 The evidence of children, 1995 1900 (NSW), July 1998 appellate courts” (2012) 24(2) JOB 9
118 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 8 — Publications list 119 A P P E N Appendix 8: Publication list continued Appendix 10 D Assistance to other jurisdictions and organisations I X 18 Common offences in the higher courts 31 The use and limitations of sentencing Bench Books In 2011–12 the Commission provided • Papua New Guinea: The Chief • Commonwealth Sentencing Database 1990–1997, August 1998 statistics, December 2004 • Civil Trials Bench Book assistance and advice to the following: Justice of Papua New Guinea visited (CSD): we continue to host, maintain 11 19 Sentencing offenders in the Local 32 Pre-sentence custody and other • Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book the Commission to discuss the and support the CSD which is Judicial education assistance that will be provided by the a joint project with the National Courts — Effects of the Criminal constraints on liberty, May 2005 • District Court Judges’ Civil Guidelines Procedure (Indictable Offenders) Act • Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum Commission to develop a sentencing Judicial College of Australia and the 33 Successful completion rates for • Equality before the Law Bench Book 1995, February 2000 supervised sentencing options, June (APJRF): The APJRF aims to advance database for PNG courts. Commonwealth Director of Public • Land and Environment Court of NSW Prosecutions. 20 Sentencing female offenders in New 2005 judicial reform in the Asia Pacific Judicial support and case management Commissioners’ Handbook (online only) • Forum Sentencing Management South Wales, May 2000 34 Trends in the use of s 12 suspended Region. The Commission is a member systems • Local Court Bench Book of the APJRF Secretariat which is System (FSMS): we continue to 21 Protective custody and hardship in sentences, June 2005 • Drug Court Case Management • Sentencing Bench Book working to develop practical tools to host, maintain and support the case prison, February 2001 35 Impact of the high range PCA guideline System: we continue to host, maintain • Sexual Assault Handbook (online only) assist member countries to implement management system for the Forum 22 Conviction and sentencing appeals judgment on sentencing drink drivers in and support case management judicial reform programs. Sentencing Program for the Department in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal NSW, September 2005 systems for the NSW Drug Court Brochures • International Organisation for Judicial of Attorney General and Justice. The 1996–2000, February 2002 36 Trends in the use of full-time and the Compulsory Drug Treatment Training (IOJT) — The IOJT was second phase of the system was 23 Sentencing mentally disordered imprisonment 2006–2007, November • Complaints against judicial officers Correctional Centre. established to promote the rule of completed in October 2011. offenders: The causal link, September 2007 • Disabilities information • Queensland Sentencing Information law by supporting the work of judicial 2002 37 Common offences in the NSW Local • From controversy to credibility: 20 years Service (QSIS): we continue to host, education institutions around the world. 24 Bail: An examination of contemporary Court, November 2008 of the Judicial Commission of New maintain and support QSIS for the The Chief Executive was elected to the issues, November 2002 South Wales Queensland Department of Justice and 38 Sentencing in complicity cases — Part 1: Executive Committee of the IOJT in • Judicial Commission of New South Attorney General. 25 Sentencing methodology: Two-tiered or Joint criminal enterprise, June 2009 November 2011. instinctive synthesis?, December 2002 39 Sentencing in complicity cases — Wales 26 Sentencing trends for armed robbery Abettors, accessories and other • Judicial Information Research System and robbery in company: The impact secondary participants, February 2010 • Judicial Information Research System: of the guideline in R v Henry, February 40 Common offences in the NSW Local An invitation to subscribe 2003 Court: 2010 • Presentation pointers: Getting started 27 Sentencing drink-driving offenders in and getting through your presentation the NSW Local Court, March 2003 Journals • Pro bono schemes in NSW 28 Common offences in the Local Courts • Judicial Officers’ Bulletin (Vols 1–24) Appendix 11 2002, September 2003 DVDs • The Judicial Review (Vols 1–10) Working with other organisations 29 Suspended sentences in New South • The role of the judge Wales, November 2003 • Concurrent evidence: New methods 30 Common offences and the use of with experts (also accessible online) Our officers represent the Commission on a Ms Ruth Windeler, Education Director Mr Murali Sagi PSM, Director, imprisonment in the District and • Circle Sentencing in New South Wales number of committees and steering groups. Member of: Information Services and Administration Supreme Courts in 2002, March 2004 (also accessible online) Details of their involvements are: • Australasian New Zealand Judicial Member of: Educators (ANZJE) • Justice Sector Chief Information Mr Ernest Schmatt PSM, Chief • Continuing Legal Education Association Officers’ Committee Executive of Australasia (CLEAA) • Justice Sector Information Exchange • Member of the Executive Committee • National Judicial Orientation Program Co-ordinating Committee of the International Organisation for Steering Committee • Joined-up-Justice Governance Judicial Training Committee Appendix 9 • Member of the Advisory Board to the Mr Hugh Donnelly, Director, Research • Fellows Committee, Australian Commonwealth Judicial Education and Sentencing Computer Society Ngara Yura program Institute, Halifax, Canada Member of: • Member of the Asia Pacific Judicial • Jury Directions Reference, New South Ms Ruth Sheard, Manager, Conferences Reform Forum Secretariat The Judicial Commission is committed to “Recommendation 96: Commission further recommends that such Wales Law Reform Commission and Communication • Member of the Australia and New • Sentencing Reference, New South • Adjudicator — Australasian Reporting promoting Aboriginal cultural awareness. That judicial officers and persons who work persons should wherever possible participate Zealand Judicial Educators Group Wales Law Reform Commission Awards We established a program in 1992 which in the court service and in the probation in discussion with members of the Aboriginal • Honorary Associate in the Graduate was renamed the Ngara Yura program in and parole services and whose duties bring community in an informal way in order to • Sexual Assault Review Committee, School of Government, University of 2008. This program is designed to inform them into contact with Aboriginal people be improve cross-cultural understanding.” Office of the Director of Public Ms Kate Lumley, Publishing Manager Sydney judicial officers about Aboriginal society, encouraged to participate in an appropriate Prosecutions • Adjudicator — Australasian Reporting customs and traditions and promote an training and development program, designed “Recommendation 97: • Member of the National Judicial Awards exchange of ideas and information. It is to explain contemporary Aboriginal society, That in devising and implementing courses Orientation Program Steering based on Recommendations 96 and 97 customs and traditions. Such programs referred to in Recommendation 96 the Committee, National Judicial College of (reproduced here) of the Royal Commission should emphasise the historical and social responsible authorities should ensure that Australia into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, National factors which contribute to the disadvantaged consultation takes place with appropriate Report, 1991, Vol 5, Australian Government position of many Aboriginal people today and Aboriginal organisations, including, but not Printing Service, Canberra. to the nature of relations between Aboriginal limited to, Aboriginal Legal Services.” and non-Aboriginal communities today. The
120 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 11 — Working with other organisations 121 A P P E N Appendix 12 Appendix 14 D Visitors to the Commission Exchange of Information I X • The Honourable Justice Frederick • Judge Jun Hwa Jeong, Seoul High Delegations The Commission actively seeks to • Department of Environment, Water, International Egonda-Ntende, Chief Justice of the Court and Commissioner of Sentencing • Delegation of 21 people consisting exchange information with other Heritage and Arts (Cth) • American Judicature Society 14 Seychelles, 8 July 2011 Commission of Korea, 6 February 2012 of Council Members of the National government agencies, academic institutions • Department of Justice and Attorney • Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum and individuals. Since its establishment, • Dr Lina Hammergren, Pacific Judicial • Professor Joo-Won Rhee, Korea Judicial Council of Nigeria and Heads General (Qld) • Australia Indonesia Partnership for the Commission has built strong links with Development Program, 27 July 2011 University School of Law, 6 February of Courts in the Nigerian Judiciary, • Department of Premier & Cabinet Justice similar organisations in other countries in • Justice Kim Sathavy, Supreme Court of 2012 15 March, 2012 • Federal Court of Australia order to share knowledge and experience, • Canadian Association of Provincial Cambodia, 18 August 2011 • Mr Jae Chul Sim, Prosecutor of South • High Court of Australia particularly in the areas of judicial education Court Judges • The Right Honourable Lord Justice Korea, 6 February 2012 and criminological research. This has • Independent Commission Against • Commonwealth Judicial Education Stanley Burnton, Court of Appeal of • Mr Justin Dowd, President, Law Society proved to be a most valuable network and, Corruption Institute, Halifax, Canada England and Wales, 18 August 2011 of NSW, 14 February, 2012 as a result, the Commission now holds a • Judicial College of Victoria • Commonwealth Magistrates’ and • District Judge Kessler Soh, Subordinate • His Honour Judge D J Carruthers, wealth of information concerning these • Judicial Conference of Australia Judges’ Association, United Kingdom Courts of Singapore, 7 September 2011 Chairperson, New Zealand Parole subjects. • Justice and Community Safety • Court of Appeal for Ontario, Canada Board, 13 April 2012 Directorate (ACT) In 2011–12, the Commission had • Court of Appeal, Seychelles discussions and exchanged information • Law and Justice Foundation of New • Federal Court, Malaysia with the following organisations: South Wales • High Court of Delhi, New Delhi, India • Law Society of New South Wales • High Court of Malaysia Appendix 13 Australian • Legal Aid Commission • High Court of Sabah and Sarawak • Attorney General’s Department (Cth) • National Judicial College of Australia Overseas visits • Institute of Judicial Studies, New • Australian Agency for International • New South Wales Law Reform Zealand Development Commission • International Association of Women • 30 October 2011–3 November 2011, • 26–27 January 2012, the Commission’s • 21–24 May 2012, Mr Ernest Schmatt • Australian Bureau of Statistics • New South Wales Police Force Judges the Commission’s Chief Executive, Chief Executive, Mr Ernest Schmatt PSM, the Commission’s Chief • Australian Institute of Criminology • New South Wales Sentencing Council • International Organisation for Judicial Mr Ernest Schmatt PSM, in his capacity PSM, in his capacity as a member Executive and Mr Murali Sagi PSM, • Australasian Institute of Judicial • Office of the Director of Public Training, Israel as a member of the Board of Governors of the Secretariat of the Asia Pacific the Commission’s Director, Information Administration Prosecutions (NSW) • Judicial Education Reference, of the International Organisation for Judicial Reform Forum, visited Jakarta, Management and Corporate Services, • Bar Association of New South Wales • Ombudsman’s Office of New South Information and Technical Transfer Judicial Training, attended the 5th Indonesia to participate in a roundtable travelled to Jakarta, Indonesia to • Bureau of Crime Statistics and Wales (JERITT) Project, Michigan, USA International Conference on the Training meeting. 132 participants attended the provide technical and capacity building Research • Parliamentary Counsel’s Office • Judicial Studies Board, London of the Judiciary in Bordeax, France. meeting. The focus of the meeting was assistance to the Judicial Commission The conference was attended by 290 to identify good practices and advance of Indonesia and the Supreme Court of • Centre for Democratic Institutions (ACT) • Public Defenders Office (NSW) • Magisterial Services of Papua New delegates from 80 countries. The theme regional cooperation, and promote Indonesia. The visit was requested by • College of Law • Roads and Maritime Services Guinea of the conference was “Restoring integrity-based reforms of judicial the Australia Indonesia Partnership for • Office of Commonwealth Director of • Sentencing Advisory Council (Vic) • National and Supreme Courts of Papua New Guinea trust and stability of the rule of law in systems in the South East Asia region. Justice (AIPJ) and funded by AusAID. Public Prosecutions • Supreme Court of Western Australia • National Association of State Judicial a globalised world”. The conference The Supreme Court of Indonesia and • 25–29 June 2012, the Commission’s • Community Relations Commission • University of New South Wales Faculty Educators, Michigan, USA provided an opportunity to exchange Judicial Commission of Indonesia in Chief Executive, Mr Ernest Schmatt • Continuing Legal Education Association of Law information about developments in partnership with the Federal Ministry • National Judicial Academy, Bhopal, PSM visited Hong Kong at the invitation of Australasia • University of Sydney Faculty of Law judicial education and training, and for Economic Co-operation and of the Chief Justice of Hong Kong, the India • Council of Australasian Tribunals • University of Western Sydney to extend links with other judicial Development of Germany, the United Honourable Geoffrey Ma. The purpose • National Judicial Institute, Canada • Criminal Law Review Division, education providers. Nations Development Program and of the visit was to advise the Hong • University of Wollongong Faculty of Department of Justice and Attorney • Philippines Judicial Academy, Manila • 21–25 November 2011, Mr Murali United Nations Office on Drugs and Kong Judicial Studies Board and senior Law General • Subordinate Courts of Singapore Sagi PSM, the Commission’s Director, Crime, conducted the meeting. The judicial officers about the Commission’s • Workers Compensation Commission • Supreme Court of Canada Information Management and Corporate meeting provided an opportunity for the experience in running judicial education • Department of Aboriginal Affairs Services, and Mr Ian MacKinnell, Commission to share its expertise with programs and developing the Judicial • Department of Attorney General and • Supreme Court of Indonesia Principal Analyst, travelled to Port jurisdictions in the Asia Pacific region. Information Research System. The Justice (NSW) • Supreme Court of the Philippines Moresby, PNG, to undertake a feasibility • 2–3 April 2012, the Commission’s Supreme Court of Hong Kong covered • Department of Corrective Services • Supreme Court of Singapore study for implementing a decision- Chief Executive, Mr Ernest Schmatt the cost of the visit. • Supreme Court of the Solomon Islands support system. The Supreme Court of PSM, attended the World Bank- • Supreme Court of Sri Lanka PNG covered the costs of their trip. sponsored International Symposium • Supreme People’s Court, Beijing, China on Judicial Reform in Ankara, Turkey. The symposium was attended by 500 participants. The objective of the symposium was to support the Turkish authorities with the implementation of Turkey’s Judicial Reform Strategy and bring together Turkish and international experts in various areas of judicial reform relevant to the implementation of the Strategy. The World Bank covered the cost of Mr Ernest Schmatt attending the symposium.
122 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 14 — Exchange of information 123 A P P E N Appendix 15 Appendix 16 D Commission officers’ presentations Access to government information I X • Mr M Sagi PSM, “The advantages of • Mr M Sagi PSM, “JIRS Presentation”, • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “The Role and Table A: Number of applications by type of applicant and outcome* industry working with educators to presentation to the Supreme Court of Function of the Judicial Commission 16 ensure ongoing relevance and increased Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, of New South Wales”, presentation to Access Access Access Information Information Refuse to Refuse to Application synergies”, presentation to the Alumni 22 December 2011 the Judicial Commission of Indonesia, granted granted refused not held already deal with confirm/ withdrawn Dinner Speech, University of Wollongong, • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “The Judicial Jakarta, Indonesia, 24 May 2012 in full in part in full available application deny 20 July 2011 Commission of NSW”, presentation • Mr E Schmatt PSM and Mr M Sagi whether • Ms R Windeler, “Judicial to the Regional Workshop on Judicial PSM, “Better Decision Making with information Communication”, presentation to the Integrity in Southeast Asia: Integrity- Technology”, a joint presentation to is held Magistrates’ Orientation Programme, based Judicial Reform, Jakarta, the Jentera School of Law, Jakarta, Media 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kiama, 31 July 2011 Indonesia, 27 January 2012 Indonesia, 24 May 2012 Members of Parliament 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Ms R Windeler , “Learning Styles and • Ms P Mizzi, “Consistency and the • Mr M Sagi PSM, “Decision Support Learning Preferences”, presentation Commonwealth Sentencing Database”, Systems”, presentation to the Supreme Private sector business 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to the Magistrates’ Orientation presentation to the Current Issues Court of Indonesia, Jakarta, 24 May 2012 Not for profit organisations or 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Programme, Kiama, 1 August 2011 in Federal Crime and Sentencing • Mr E Schmatt PSM and Mr M Sagi PSM, community groups • Ms R Windeler, “Familiarisation/ Conference, National Judicial College “The Roles of the Judicial Commission Members of the public 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Orientation”, presentation to the of Australia and ANU College of Law, of NSW in the Justice System”, a joint (application by legal Canberra, 11 February 2012 Magistrates’ Orientation Programme, presentation to the Australia-Indonesia representative) Kiami, 2 August 2011 • Ms R Windeler, “Communication”, Partnership for Justice Program, • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Complaints presentation to the Land and Indonesia, 25 May 2012 Members of the public (other) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Against Judicial Officers”, presentation Environment Court Twilight Seminar: • Ms R Windeler, “Wrap-up”, presentation * More than one decision can be made in respect of a particular access application. If so, a recording must be made in relation to each to the Children’s Legal Services Mutual Observation, 360 Feedback & to the National Judicial Orientation such decision. This also applies to Table B. Conference, Parramatta, 24 September Communication, 15 February 2012 Programme, Glenelg, 25 May 2012 2011 • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Continuing • Mr M Sagi PSM, “Occasional Address”, • Mr M Sagi PSM, “JIRS Presentation” , Judicial Education”, presentation to presentation at the Induction of presentation to the Sentencing Council the Commonwealth Secretariat Pacific Professor Michael Johnson, Macquarie Table B: Number of applications by type of application and outcome for England and Wales, London, Judges Regional Forum, Sydney, University as Fellow of the Australian 3 October 2011 16 March 2012 Computer Society, 28 May 2012 Access Access Access Information Information Refuse to Refuse to Application • Ms R Windeler, “Familiarisation/ • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Ensuring Judicial • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Judicial Support granted granted refused not held already deal with confirm/ withdrawn Orientation”, presentation to Integrity – The New South Wales Systems: The Judicial Information in full in part in full available application deny the National Judicial Orientation Experience”, presentation at the Research System”, presentation to the whether Programme, Aitken Hill, Victoria, Judicial Reform Symposium, Ankara, Committee on Information Technology, information 6 November 2011 Turkey, 3 April 2012 Supreme Court of Hong Kong, Hong is held • Ms P Mizzi, “Sentencing for child • Mr M Sagi PSM, “JIRS Presentation”, Kong, 26 June 2012 Personal information 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pornography offences”, presentation presentation to the ACT Attorney • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Better Decision applications* General, Parliament House, Canberra, to the Judicial Development Program Making with Technology”, presentation Access applications (other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 for South Australian judges and 15 May 2012 to the High Court of Hong Kong, Hong than personal information magistrates, Adelaide, 3 November • Ms R Windeler, “Familiarisation”, Kong, 27 June 2012 applications) 2011 presentation to the National Judicial • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “The Judicial Access applications that are 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Ms R Windeler, “Communication Tips”, Orientation Programme, Glenelg, Information Research System”, partly personal information 20 May 2012 presentation to the Judgment Writing presentation to the High Court of Hong applications and partly other Workshop for Commissioners of the • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “The Role and Kong, Hong Kong, 28 June 2012 Land and Environment Court of NSW, Function of the Judicial Commission of • Mr E Schmatt PSM, “Better Decision * A personal information application is an access application for personal information (as defined in clause 4 of Schedule 4 to the Act) Sydney, 1 December, 2011 New South Wales”, presentation to the Making with Technology”, presentation about the applicant (the applicant being an individual). • Mr M Sagi PSM, “Occasional Address”, Supreme Court of Indonesia, Jakarta, to the Hong Kong Judiciary, Hong Kong, presentation to the Graduation Indonesia, 23 May 2012 28 June 2012 Ceremony University of Wollongong, Table C: Invalid applications 14 December 2011
Reason for invalidity Number of applications Application does not comply with formal requirements (section 41 of the Act) 0 Application is for excluded information of the agency (section 43 of the Act) 0 Application contravenes restraint order (section 110 of the Act) 0 Total number of invalid applications received 0 Invalid applications that subsequently became valid applications 0
124 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 16 — Access to government information 125 A P P E N Appendix 16: Public access to government information continued Appendix 17 D Other compliance matters I X Table D: Conclusive presumption of overriding public interest against disclosure: matters listed in Schedule 1 of the Act Application for extension of time No extension applied for. Code of conduct The code of conduct is available to all staff on the Commission’s 17 Number of times consideration used* intranet. As no amendments were made in 2011–12, the Commission is Overriding secrecy laws 0 not required to reproduce the code of conduct. Cabinet information 0 Controlled entities, disclosure of The Commission has no controlled entities. Executive Council information 0 Community Relations Commission, agreements with No agreements have been entered into. Contempt 0 Disability plan The Commission is not required to report on a disability plan under the Legal professional privilege 0 Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2002. Excluded information 0 Events with a significant effect on the succeeding year after Not applicable. Documents affecting law enforcement and public safety 0 the balance date Transport safety 0 Executive officers, performance Not reported because the Commission’s executive officers are not Adoption 0 employed under the Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2002 but under the Judicial Officers Act 1986. Care and protection of children 0 Funds granted to non-government community organisations None. Ministerial code of conduct 0 Heritage management Not applicable. Aboriginal and environmental heritage 0 Implementation of price determination Not applicable. * More than one public interest consideration may apply in relation to a particular access application and, if so, each such consideration Land disposal The Commission does not own and did not dispose of any property. is to be recorded (but only once per application). This also applies in relation to Table E. Major assets The Commission does not own any major assets. Multicultural Policies and Services Plan Refer to p 76. Table E: Other public interest considerations against disclosure: matters listed in table to section 14 of the Act Requirements arising from employment arrangements Not applicable. Responses to reports of parliamentary committees and No significant matters requiring a response were raised. Number of occasions when Auditor-General application not successful Subsidiaries, disclosure of The Commission has no subsidiaries. Responsible and effective government 0 Waste Refer to p 80 for our environmental reporting. Law enforcement and security 0 Individual rights, judicial processes and natural justice 0 Business interests of agencies and other persons 0 Glossary Environment, culture, economy and general matters 0 AIJA — Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration Incorporated Secrecy provisions 0 Appointed member — A non-judicial member of the Judicial Commission of NSW: see also Official member. Exempt documents under interstate Freedom of Information legislation 0 Bench Books — Reference books for judicial officers. Complaint — A complaint against a judicial officer about ability or behaviour, either made by a member of the public or Table F: Timeliness referred to the Commission by the Attorney General. Conduct Division — A special panel that examines a particular complaint referred to it by the Commission. Number of applications Education day — Calculated on the basis of 5 to 6 instructional hours attended by a judicial officer. Decided within the statutory timeframe (20 days plus any extensions) 0 Help desk — A telephone service for judicial officers that provides assistance with all aspects of computer usage. Decided after 35 days (by agreement with applicant) 0 JIRS — see Judicial Information Research System. Not decided within time (deemed refusal) 0 Judicial Commission — 1. An independent statutory organisation established by the Judicial Officers Act 1986. Total 0 2. The Appointed Members and Official Members, collectively. Judicial Information — An online legal reference tool for judicial officers, relevant government organisations and members Research System (JIRS) of the legal profession. Table G: Number of applications reviewed under Part 5 of the Act (by type of review and outcome) Judicial officer — As defined in the Judicial Officers Act 1986: • a judge or associate judge of the Supreme Court Decision Decision Total • a member (including a judicial member) of the Industrial Relations Commission varied upheld • a judge of the Land and Environment Court Internal review 0 0 0 • a judge of the District Court Review by Information Commissioner* 0 0 0 • the president of the Children’s Court Internal review following recommendation under section 93 of Act 0 0 0 • a magistrate, or Review by ADT 0 0 0 • the president of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. Total 0 0 0 The definition of judicial officer includes acting appointments to a judicial office, but does not include arbitrators, registrars, chamber registrars, assessors, members of tribunals, legal representatives, retired * The Information Commissioner does not have the authority to vary decisions, but can make recommendation to the original decision- judicial officers or federal judicial officers. maker. The data in this case indicates that a recommendation to vary or uphold the original decision has been made. Ngara Yura program — Aboriginal cultural awareness program for judicial officers. NJCA — National Judicial College of Australia Table H: Applications for review under Part 5 of the Act (by type of applicant) NSW — New South Wales Official member — A judicial member of the Judicial Commission of NSW. Number of applications for review Pre-bench training — An induction program for newly appointed magistrates to assist them with their transition to the bench. Applications by access applicants 0 Vexatious complainant — The Judicial Officers Act 1986 empowers the Commission to declare as a vexatious complainant a Applications by persons to whom information the subject of access application 0 person who habitually and persistently, and mischievously or without any reasonable grounds, makes relates (see section 54 of the Act) complaints about judicial officers. The effect of the declaration is that the Commission may disregard any further complaint from the complainant.
126 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Appendix 17 — Other compliance matters and Glossary 127 I N D E X Index
Entries in italic indicate compliance with head of jurisdiction, referral to . . . . 26 governance ...... 2, 70–81 communicated criminal law educating with free resources . . . . 51 program ...... 6, 21 statutory reporting requirements highlights ...... 42 outcomes ...... 70 developments ...... 21, 39 engagement with ...... 54–6 research studies ...... 20 how to make ...... 43 practices ...... 72–4 data accuracy ...... 21 Hong Kong Judicial Studies Board, satisfaction ...... 20–3 A informal enquiries ...... 26, 44 structure ...... 72 enhancements ...... 40 advice to ...... 56 sentencing law decision ...... 41 Aboriginal cultural awareness program — see judicial officers, against, targets ...... 70 improving resources ...... 22 Indigenous communities — see also Ngara sentencing patterns ...... 41 Ngara Yura Program guidelines ...... 45, 109–11 looking ahead ...... 23, 40 Yura Program ...... 51 sexual assault and evidence . . 41, 52–3 access to Government information . .77, 125–7 key results ...... 4–5 H publications accessed on ...... 21 information and advice . . . . 51–2, 54 strategies ...... 37 applications ...... 77 key services ...... 5 heritage management ...... 127 regard for ...... 21 international ...... 50, 55, 57 revenue ...... 84 looking ahead ...... 77 looking ahead ...... 27, 45 history ...... 3 support system ...... 38 International Organisation for risk management policy ...... 75 proactive release program, review of . 77 magistrates’ behaviour, concerning . . 47 Hong Kong Judicial Studies Board . . . . 56 use of ...... 22 Judicial Training (IOJT) . . . 57, 121 business continuity ...... 74 after balance date events having a significant monitoring ...... 27 human resources — see staff judicial officer judicial education providers . . . . . 56 CEO attestation ...... 81 effect in succeeding year ...... 127 number ...... 6, 25, 43 complaints against, guidelines . . 109–11 judicial reform in Region . . . . . 55, 56 Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum . 56, 121 outcomes ...... 24 I training ...... 18 Lawcodes database, maintaining and S enhancing ...... 52 assets ...... 84 output ...... 25 Independent Auditor’s Report . . . . . 86–7 Judicial Officers’ Bulletin ...... 31, 35 sentencing — see research and sentencing Legal Aid NSW, assisting ...... 54 Audit and Risk Management particulars ...... 25 Indigenous overrepresentation in criminal judicial performance ...... 4–5 Sentencing Bench Book ...... 20 Committee ...... 74, 115 looking ahead . . . . 50, 52, 53, 55, 57 patterns, identifying ...... 27 justice system ...... 35 judicial reform ...... 55 service group expenditure ...... 84 meeting attendance ...... 74 national ...... 50 process (flowchart) ...... 46 information exchange ...... 123 The Judicial Review ...... 31 service measures ...... 5 outcomes ...... 74 NSW public and community groups . . 51 received ...... 25 insurance ...... 77 jury directions, revision of ...... 39 services ...... 5 Treasury guidelines, compliance with . 74 outcomes ...... 48 retirement of judicial officer . . . . . 47 internal audit ...... 74 customer response, guaranteeing . . . 78 auditor-general reports, responses to . . 127 CEO attestation ...... 81 K presentation on sexual offence electronic delivery of ...... 78 satisfaction ...... 25 evidence ...... 52–3 Auditor’s Report, Independent . . . . 86–7 challenge ...... 77 key results ...... 4 Sexual Assault Handbook ...... 32 strategies ...... 43 regional forum on corruption . . . . . 55 substitution for appeals ...... 47 International Organisation for Judicial key services ...... 5 staff ...... 2, 66–9 B Training (IOJT) ...... 57, 121 research assistance ...... 52 attendance ...... 66 targets ...... 27 resources, appreciation of ...... 50 bench books ...... 20, 32, 39, 120 iPad technology ...... 29, 31, 32 L challenges ...... 69 timeliness in dealing with ...... 25 satisfaction ...... 50 challenges ...... 40 land disposal ...... 127 conditions, setting ...... 67 trends ...... 27 sentencing presentations, committees ...... 114 J Lawcodes database ...... 52 consultants ...... 67 where Commission has no power . . . . 44 acknowledgement by lawyers . . . 50 looking ahead ...... 40 judicial education ...... 4–5, 6–7 Legal Aid NSW ...... 54 employee communication ...... 67 compliance ...... 127 Turkish judicial reform ...... 55 Bureau of Crime Statistics and Aboriginal Cultural Awareness legislation, changes to ...... 73 employment arrangements . . . . . 127 letter to Attorney General ...... 2 valuing publications ...... 50 Research ...... 52, 53 program ...... 16, 34 legislative charter ...... 73 equal opportunity ...... 68–9 consultants ...... 67 working with other organisations . . . . . 121 achievements ...... 31–4 liabilities ...... 84 five-year comparison ...... 66, 78 controlled entities, disclosure of . . . . 127 payment of accounts ...... 85 C assistance to Asia Pacific neighbours — library service ...... 79 flexible work arrangements . . . . . 67 corporate functions ...... 10 performance targets and results . . . . 4–5 case management systems . . . . . 55, 121 see Partners challenge ...... 79 guaranteeing service and consumer corruption forum ...... 55 President’s foreword ...... 8 charter ...... 73 attendance ...... 13 looking ahead ...... 79 response ...... 78 Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book . 20, 32, 39 price determination ...... 127 Chief Executive’s message ...... 9 auditing ...... 14 major assets ...... 127 induction ...... 67 Civil Trials Bench Book ...... 32 case studies ...... 35 privacy management plan ...... 77 internships ...... 68 D proactive release program ...... 77 looking ahead ...... 69 committee ...... 114 challenges ...... 18, 35 M disability plan ...... 127 public access to resources ...... 77 multicultural society, needs of . . . . 76 code of conduct ...... 127 communication skills ...... 32 management and structure — see also domestic violence cases ...... 32 publications ...... 16, 17, 31, 119–20 Commission management team . . . . 64–5 complaints, effect of, on ...... 43 Commission members; executive officers . .64–9 outcomes ...... 58 articles published ...... 118–19 Commission meetings ...... 73 computer training and support . . . . 18 committees ...... 114–15 performance reviews ...... 78 E electronic delivery ...... 32, 78 Commission members ...... 60–3, 72 conference paper database . . . . . 32 our organisation ...... 2 recognising achievements ...... 68 education — see judicial education value of ...... 50 attendance at meetings ...... 73 conferences . . . . . 15, 17, 32, 115–17 mission ...... 2 retaining ...... 66 employees — see staff conflicts of interest ...... 72 design ...... 31 multicultural policies and services program . 76 safe working environment ...... 78 functions ...... 72 employment arrangements ...... 127 distance education ...... 32 R satisfaction ...... 59, 66 environmental sustainability — see sustainability record management ...... 79 names and qualifications . . . . . 60–3 domestic violence matters . . . . . 32 N senior management remuneration . . . 72 Equality Before the Law Bench Book . . 120 research and development remuneration ...... 72 expenditure ...... 12 national water regulation sentencing database targets ...... 58 responsibilities ...... 72 executive officers ...... 64–5 feedback ...... 16 (NWRSD) ...... 53 assistance to agencies ...... 52–3 training and development ...... 67 committees ...... 114–15 Chief Executive, appointment . . . . 73 field trips ...... 16, 32, 118 Ngara Yura Program ...... 34, 51 research and sentencing ...... 4–5 turnover rate ...... 66 Commonwealth Sentencing Database, Chief Executive, role ...... 73 film, through ...... 32 committee ...... 114 bench book information ...... 20 wages, setting ...... 67 design of ...... 39 performance ...... 127 financial performance ...... 12 NSW government, relationship with . . . 73 case studies ...... 41 work experience ...... 68 community — see partners presentations by ...... 124 highlights 2011–12 ...... 30 challenge ...... 23, 40 strategic focus ...... 2, 7 Community Relations Commission, remuneration ...... 72 interactive programs ...... 32 O common offences in NSW Children’s Court, structure ...... 2, 72 agreement with ...... 127 extension of time ...... 127 iPad technology ...... 31 occupational health and safety . . . . 75, 78 study of ...... 39 subsidiaries, disclosure of ...... 127 complaints ...... 109–12 external audit ...... 74 looking ahead ...... 18, 35 organisational profile ...... 2 common offences in NSW Local Court, sustainability ...... 80 study of ...... 39 allegations of failure to give fair hearing 24 magistrates, orientation for new . 35, 117 outlook ...... 7 challenges ...... 80 Commonwealth Sentencing Database, Attorney General, referral from . . . . 26 F national benchmarking ...... 13 overseas visits ...... 122 energy use ...... 80 design of ...... 39 benchmarking ...... 25 financial management ...... 7, 82–107 orientation sessions . . . . . 15, 35, 117 looking ahead ...... 80 consistency in ...... 19–27 case studies ...... 47 outcomes ...... 82 outcomes ...... 12 P measures ...... 80 criminal law developments . . . . 21, 39 causes ...... 27 surplus ...... 83 performance ...... 12–18 parliamentary committees, responses to . 127 data accuracy ...... 21 challenges ...... 27, 45 targets ...... 82 policy ...... 113 partners ...... 2, 48–57 T expenditure ...... 19 technology ...... 78–9 complainant guidelines ...... 45 financial performance ...... 85 programs, continuing ...... 6, 30–5 agencies, other government Conduct Division, financial report ...... 88–107 publications ...... 16, 17, 31 sector ...... 52–3, 121 financial performance ...... 19 training — see judicial education referral to . . . . . 6, 26, 44, 111–12 financial statements, certification of . . . 87 regional programs ...... 16 appreciation of work ...... 50 highlights ...... 36, 39–40 Treasury Guidelines, compliance with . . . 74 consumer response ...... 78 financial summary 2011—12 . . . . . 7, 84 satisfaction ...... 14–18 Asia Pacific region, judicial reform in . 56, 121 Judicial Information Research Service — Turkish judicial reform ...... 55 see Judicial Information Research dealing with ...... 43, 109–12 Forum Sentencing Program ...... 53 satisfaction ratings ...... 14 assistance to other jurisdictions and Service (JIRS) V dismissal ...... 26, 110 freedom of information — see access to seminar programs . . . 16, 17, 33, 1118 organisations ...... 121 jury directions, revision of ...... 39 examination of . . . .24–7, 42–7, 111–12 Government information strategies ...... 31 Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, values ...... 2 key results ...... 4—5 expenditure ...... 24 funds granted to non-government community training judicial officers . . . . . 12–18 working with ...... 52 vision ...... 2 key services ...... 5 failure to give fair hearing ...... 47 organisations ...... 127 workshops ...... 16, 118 case studies ...... 54, 56, 57 visitors ...... 122 looking ahead ...... 23, 40 financial performance ...... 24 Judicial Information Research System challenges ...... 52, 53, 55, 57 formal complaints governance . . . . 44 G (JIRS) ...... 38 community awareness ...... 6, 52 national benchmarking ...... 20 W further action, complaints requiring . . 44 Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) . . . 1, 130 accessibility ...... 22, 31, 40 courts’ case management systems, online sentencing resources . . . . . 22 waste reduction ...... 80, 127 guidelines ...... 109–12 glossary ...... 127 challenges ...... 23, 40 support for ...... 55 outcomes ...... 19 workplace systems and technology . . 78–9
128 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Index 129 G R I
I GRI index N D E 3. Report Parameters This is the Commission’s second In this report, in line with the GRI Reporting The Commission’s self-declared Application X Profile Disclosure Description Reported Cross-reference/ sustainability report where we report against Framework, we aim to: Level is C. A “C” Report Application level Direct answer the GRI descriptors and disclosures. • show outcomes and results in the requires the Commission to report on 1.1, context of our statutory mandate, 2.1–2.10, 3.1–3.8, 3.10–3.12, 4.1–4.4, 4.14– 3.1 Reporting period R 1 July 2011– “Sustainability reporting” is a term broadly strategies and management approach 4.15 and a minimum of 10 Performance 30 June 2012 used to describe reporting about an Indicators, including at least one from each • show that we are being accountable 3.2 Date of most recent previous report (if any). R 1 organisation’s economic, environmental and of: social, economic and environment. social performance and impacts. The GRI to those we serve and our partners 3.3 Reporting cycle (annual, biennial, etc.) R Annual is concerned to make organisations of any for our organisational performance The scope and boundary of the annual 3.4 Contact point for questions regarding the report or its contents. R Back cover size, location or sector make new decisions towards the goal of sustainable report is determined by the Commission’s about the way their operations, products, development. three key operational activities as measured 3.5 Process for defining report content. R Inside front cover, services and activities impact on the earth, • provide a balanced and reasonable by the performance indicators shown page 130 people and economies. account of our economic, on pp 4–5 as well as the Commission’s 3.6 Boundary of the report R Inside front cover, environmental and social performance. engagements with its stakeholders as pages 1, 130 reported at pp 48–57, 121–123. The Commission has no entitites over which it 3.7 State any specific limitations on the scope or boundary of the report. R Pages 127, 130 exercises control or signficant influence. 3.8 Basis for reporting on joint ventures, subsidiaries, leased facilities, NA There are no identified material exclusions outsourced operations, and other entities that can significantly affect from this report. comparability from period to period and/or between organisations. 3.10 Explanation of the effect of any restatements of information provided R There were in earlier reports. no effects of Key restatements R – reported of information NR – not reported provided in earlier PR – partially reported reports NA – not relevant to the Judicial Commission 3.11 Significant changes from previous reporting periods in the scope, R There were no boundary, or measurement methods applied in the report. significant changes from last year’s annual report in the G3 Content Index - GRI Application Level C scope, boundary Application Level C or measurements methods applied in STANDARD DISCLOSURES PART I: Profile Disclosures the report REPORT FULLY ON THE BELOW SELECTION OF PROFILE DISCLOSURES OR PROVIDE A REASON FOR OMISSION 3.12 Table identifying the location of the Standard Disclosures in the report. R Page 127 1. Strategy and Analysis 4. Governance, Commitments, and Engagement Profile Disclosure Description Reported Cross-reference/ Profile Disclosure Description Reported Cross-reference/ Direct answer Direct answer 1.1 Statement from Chief Executive R Page 9 4.1 Governance structure of the organisation, including committees R Pages 72–75, 114 under the highest governance body responsible for specific tasks, 2. Organisational Profile such as setting strategy or organisational oversight. Profile Disclosure Description Reported Cross-reference/ 4.2 Indicate whether the Chair of the highest governance body is also R The President of Direct answer an executive officer. the Commission is 2.1 Judicial Commission of NSW R Page 2 not an Executive Officer 2.2 Primary brands, products, and/or services. R Year at a glance inside front cover 4.3 For organisations that have a unitary board structure, state the R Page 60 number of members of the highest governance body that are 2.3 Operational structure of Commission, including main divisions, R Page 72 independent and/or non-executive members. operating companies, subsidiaries, and joint ventures. 4.4 Mechanisms for employees to provide recommendations or R Page 72 2.4 Location of organisation’s headquarters. R Back cover direction to the highest governance body. 2.5 Number of countries where the organisation operates, and names R Page 2 4.14 List of stakeholder groups the Commission engages with. R Pages 48, 121–123 of countries with either major operations or that are specifically relevant to the sustainability issues covered in the report. 4.15 Basis for identification and selection of stakeholders with whom to R Pages 2, 50 engage. 2.6 Nature of ownership and legal form. R Page 2 2.7 Markets served (including geographic breakdown, sectors served, R Page 2, 48 and types of customers/beneficiaries). 2.8 Scale of the reporting organisation. R Pages 1, 2 2.9 Significant changes during the reporting period regarding size, R Pages 8, 9 structure, or ownership. 2.10 Awards received in the reporting period. R Page 68
130 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 GRI Index 131 G R I
I GRI index continued N D E X STANDARD DISCLOSURES PART III: Performance Indicators Biodiversity REPORT FULLY ON 10 CORE OR ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS - AT LEAST 1 FROM EACH EN11 Location and size of land owned, leased, managed in, or adjacent NA DIMENSION (ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL) to, protected areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas. Economic EN12 Description of significant impacts of activities, products, and NA Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ services on biodiversity in protected areas and areas of high Indicator Direct answer biodiversity value outside protected areas. Economic performance EN13 Habitats protected or restored. NA EC1 Direct economic value generated and distributed, including R Financial Report: EN14 Strategies, current actions, and future plans for managing impacts NA revenues, operating costs, employee compensation, donations and pages 82–107 on biodiversity. other community investments, retained earnings, and payments to capital providers and governments. EN15 Number of IUCN Red List species and national conservation list NA species with habitats in areas affected by operations, by level of EC2 Financial implications and other risks and opportunities for the NA extinction risk. organisation’s activities due to climate change. Emissions, effluents and waste EC3 Coverage of the organisation’s defined benefit plan obligations. R Page 67 EN16 Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. R Page 80 EC4 Significant financial assistance received from government. R Page 7, 84 EN17 Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. NR not measured Market presence EN18 Initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reductions achieved. R Page 80 EC5 Range of ratios of standard entry level wage compared to local NA minimum wage at significant locations of operation. EN19 Emissions of ozone-depleting substances by weight. NR not measured EC6 Policy, practices, and proportion of spending on locally-based NA EN20 NOx, SOx, and other significant air emissions by type and weight. NR not measured suppliers at significant locations of operation. EN21 Total water discharge by quality and destination. NR not measured EC7 Procedures for local hiring and proportion of senior management NA EN22 Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. R Page 80 hired from the local community at significant locations of operation. EN23 Total number and volume of significant spills. NA Indirect economic impacts EN24 Weight of transported, imported, exported, or treated waste deemed NA EC8 Development and impact of infrastructure investments and services NA hazardous under the terms of the Basel Convention Annex I, II, III, and provided primarily for public benefit through commercial, in-kind, or VIII, and percentage of transported waste shipped internationally. pro bono engagement. EN25 Identity, size, protected status, and biodiversity value of water NA EC9 Understanding and describing significant indirect economic impacts, NA bodies and related habitats significantly affected by the reporting including the extent of impacts. organisation’s discharges of water and runoff. Environmental Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Indicator Direct answer Indicator Direct answer Products and services Materials EN26 Initiatives to mitigate environmental impacts of products and services, R Page 80 EN1 Materials used by weight or volume. R Page 80 and extent of impact mitigation. EN2 Percentage of materials used that are recycled input materials. R Page 80 EN27 Percentage of products sold and their packaging materials that are NA reclaimed by category. Energy Compliance EN3 Direct energy consumption by primary energy source. R Page 80 EN28 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non- NA EN4 Indirect energy consumption by primary source. NR not measured monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws EN5 Energy saved due to conservation and efficiency improvements. R Page 80 and regulations. Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Transport Indicator Direct answer EN29 Significant environmental impacts of transporting products and NR not measured EN6 Initiatives to provide energy-efficient or renewable energy based R Page 80 other goods and materials used for the organisation’s operations, products and services, and reductions in energy requirements as a and transporting members of the workforce. result of these initiatives. Overall EN7 Initiatives to reduce indirect energy consumption and reductions NR not measured EN30 Total environmental protection expenditures and investments by type. NA achieved. Water EN8 Total water withdrawal by source. NR not measured EN9 Water sources significantly affected by withdrawal of water. NR not measured EN10 Percentage and total volume of water recycled and reused. NR not measured
132 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 GRI Index 133 G R I
I GRI index continued N D E X Social: Labour Practices and Decent Work Non-discrimination Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ HR4 Total number of incidents of discrimination and actions taken. R No incidents Indicator Direct answer reported: page 68 Employment Freedom of association and collective bargaining LA1 Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and R Page 66 HR5 Operations identified in which the right to exercise freedom of NA region. association and collective bargaining may be at significant risk, and actions taken to support these rights. LA2 Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, PR Page 69 and region. Child labor LA3 Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to NA HR6 Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of child labour, NA temporary or part-time employees, by major operations. and measures taken to contribute to the elimination of child labour. Labour/management relations Forced and compulsory labor LA4 Percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining NA HR7 Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of NA agreements. forced or compulsory labour, and measures to contribute to the elimination of forced or compulsory labour. LA5 Minimum notice period(s) regarding significant operational changes, NA including whether it is specified in collective agreements. Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Indicator Direct answer Occupational health and safety Security practices LA6 Percentage of total workforce represented in formal joint R Page 76 management-worker health and safety committees that help HR8 Percentage of security personnel trained in the organisation’s NA monitor and advise on occupational health and safety programs. policies or procedures concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations. LA7 Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, R Page 66 and number of work-related fatalities by region. Indigenous rights LA8 Education, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control NA HR9 Total number of incidents of violations involving rights of indigenous NA No incidents programs in place to assist workforce members, their families, or people and actions taken. reported community members regarding serious diseases. Social: Society LA9 Health and safety topics covered in formal agreements with trade NA Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ unions. Indicator Direct answer Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Community Indicator Direct answer SO1 Nature, scope, and effectiveness of any programs and practices PR Ngara Yura Training and education that assess and manage the impacts of operations on communities, program reported LA10 Average hours of training per year per employee by employee PR Page 67 including entering, operating, and exiting. at page 34 category. Corruption LA11 Programs for skills management and lifelong learning that support R Page 67 SO2 Percentage and total number of business units analyzed for risks PR Pages 74–75 the continued employability of employees and assist them in related to corruption. managing career endings. SO3 Percentage of employees trained in organisation’s anti-corruption PR Senior executives LA12 Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career R Page 67 policies and procedures. development reviews. SO4 Actions taken in response to incidents of corruption. NA No incidents Diversity and equal opportunity reported LA13 Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees R Pages 69, 72–73 Public policy per category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity. SO5 Public policy positions and participation in public policy R Commission development and lobbying. governance LA14 Ratio of basic salary of men to women by employee category. PR Page 72 SO6 Total value of financial and in-kind contributions to political parties, NA Commission makes Social: Human Rights politicians, and related institutions by country. no contributions to Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ political parties or Indicator Direct answer politicians Investment and procurement practices Anti-competitive behavior HR1 Percentage and total number of significant investment agreements NA SO7 Total number of legal actions for anti-competitive behavior, anti- NA No legal actions for that include human rights clauses or that have undergone human trust, and monopoly practices and their outcomes. anti-competitive rights screening. behaviour, anti- trust, and monopoly HR2 Percentage of significant suppliers and contractors that have NR practices and their undergone screening on human rights and actions taken. outcomes HR3 Total hours of employee training on policies and procedures NR Compliance concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations, including the percentage of employees trained. SO8 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non- NA No significant fines monetary sanctions for non-compliance with laws and regulations. and no monetary sanctions for non-compliance with laws and regulations
134 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 GRI Index 135 GRI index continued Five years at a glance
Social: Product Responsibility 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Performance Description Reported Cross-reference/ Continuing judicial education and training Indicator Direct answer Number of judicial education days per year 1,294 1,396 1,554 1,389 870† Customer health and safety Number of educational programs 34 38 39 37 34 PR1 Life cycle stages in which health and safety impacts of products NA Overall satisfaction rating with judicial education programs 91% 90% 91% 93% 95% and services are assessed for improvement, and percentage % of voluntary attendance at annual conferences 88% 86% 90% 93% 77% of significant products and services categories subject to such procedures. % of voluntary attendance at magistrates’ induction/orientation programs 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PR2 Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and NA Average number of training days offered per judicial officer per court 4.9 5 5.2 5.3 4.0 voluntary codes concerning health and safety impacts of products (excluding orientation programs) and services during their life cycle, by type of outcomes. Average number of training days undertaken per judicial officer 4.4 4.8 5.3 4.7 3.0† Product and service labelling % of judicial officers who attended at least 2 days of judicial training 88% 86% 90% 93% 82% PR3 Type of product and service information required by procedures, NA Number of publications (including bench book updates, bulletins, 27 24 23 23 21 and percentage of significant products and services subject to such journals, education monographs and training DVDs)* information requirements. Number of computer training sessions** 105 67 43 26 109.5 hrs PR4 Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and NA Research and sentencing voluntary codes concerning product and service information and labeling, by type of outcomes. JIRS usage (average page hits per month) 56,722 77,684 84,312 88,704 99,172 PR5 Practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of R Throughout this % of JIRS availability 99% 99% 99% 99% 99% surveys measuring customer satisfaction. annual report Number of enhancements to JIRS 5 8 11 10 11 Marketing communications Timeliness of sentencing material on JIRS PR6 Programs for adherence to laws, standards, and voluntary codes NA – Recent Law items posted on JIRS 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks related to marketing communications, including advertising, – Judgments (within number of days of receipt) 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day promotion, and sponsorship. – Summaries of important judgments (within number of weeks of receipt) 1–4 weeks 4 weeks 4 weeks 6 weeks 6 weeks PR7 Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and NA – Sentencing statistics loaded on JIRS (within number of months of receipt) 2 1–3 1–4 1–4 1–4 voluntary codes concerning marketing communications, including months months months months months advertising, promotion, and sponsorship by type of outcomes. Number of sentencing trends papers and monographs 3 2 2 3 2 Customer privacy Timely Sentencing Bench Book updates 5 4 3 3 3 PR8 Total number of substantiated complaints regarding breaches of None: page 77 customer privacy and losses of customer data. Timely updates to the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book 3 6 4 3 3 Lawcodes: % of new and amended offences coded and distributed 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Compliance within 4 days of commencement PR9 Monetary value of significant fines for non-compliance with laws None and regulations concerning the provision and use of products and Examining complaints services. % of complaints acknowledged within 1 week of receipt 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% % of complaints examined within 6 months of receipt 99% 92% 91% 95% 68% % of complaints examined within 12 months of receipt 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% Complaints received (number) 66 55 70 60 110 Complaints examined (number) 66 49 64 56 90 People Inhouse staff (number) 39 39 38 38 40 Length of service: 5 years or greater 61% 59% 73% 68% 58% Practices, Policies and Processes Access to information requests 0 0 0 0 0 Environmental sustainability Annual Report of the Judicial Commission of NSW 2011–12 Total energy used 433GJ 550GJ 521GJ 503GJ 478GJ Published by the Judicial Commission of NSW 2011 % of recycled paper used 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ISSN 1441-8444 Finance Revenue from Parliament $4.757 M $4.645 M $4.944 M $5.395 M $5.215 M Cost: The total external costs incurred in the Writer: Kate Lumley This report is printed on Retained revenue (sale of goods & services, investment income, etc) $598,000 $678,000 $687,000 $681,000 $673,000 production of this report were $13,766 Designer: Lorraine Beal Sovereign Silk: Expenditure $5.375 M $5.471 M $5.655 M $6.094 M $5.870 M FSC certified — FSC C008478 Format: The annual report is also available on the Printer: Emerald Press Commission’s website at www.judcom. ISO 14001 EMS † the Local Court Annual Conference was not held this financial year . Photography: Smarter Digital, and Elemental Chlorine Free nsw.gov.au * We changed our measure to include Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book updates in Research and sentencing: see p 36 . Commission staff Acid Free ** We changed our measure this year to measure hours of computer training .
136 Judicial Commission of NSW Annual Report 2011–12 Judicial Commission of NSW
Office hours: 8.30 am – 5.00 pm Telephone: 9299 4421 International +61 2 9299 4421 Level 5, Thakral House, 301 George Street Facsimile: 02 9290 3194 Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Email: [email protected] GPO Box 3634 Sydney NSW 2001 Website: www.judcom.nsw.gov.au