Decisional independence is not a shield for abandnment of reason

Judicial officers [File, Standard]

Judicial officers have, over time, developed a remarkably effective reflex when they face scrutiny before the Judicial Service Commission. A judge accused of producing a decision that the record cannot support will, with considerable regularity, retreat behind the principle of decisional independence, arguing that his assessment of the evidence, his weighing of competing legal considerations, and ultimately his conclusion, are matters of internal decisional independence that no disciplinary body may examine without trespassing on his constitutional freedom to decide. It is a powerful defence. It is also in the hands of a corrupt or incompetent judge.

From the outset, a distinction must be drawn. Judicial independence and decisional independence are related but fundamentally different concepts. Judicial independence is an external shield. It protects the institution of the judiciary and judicial officers from interference by the