Judicial Service Commission Act of 1994 (Act No. 9 of 1994)RegulationsCode of Judicial Conduct for JudgesArticle 9 : Fair trial |
A judge must—
| (a) | resolve disputes by making findings of fact and applying the appropriate law in a fair hearing, which includes the duty to— |
| (i) | observe the letter and spirit of the audi alteram partem rule; |
| (ii) | remain manifestly impartial; and |
| (iii) | give adequate reasons for any decision; |
| (b) | in conducting judicial proceedings— |
| (i) | maintain order; |
| (ii) | act in accordance with commonly accepted decorum; and |
| (iii) | remain patient and courteous to legal practitioners, parties and the public, and require them to act likewise; |
| (c) | manage legal proceedings in such a way as to— |
| (i) | expedite their conclusion as cost-effectively as possible; and |
| (ii) | not shift the responsibility to hear and decide a matter to another judge; and |
| (d) | not exert undue influence in order to promote a settlement or obtain a concession from any party. |
Notes:
| Note 9(i): | The duty to grant a party a fair hearing does not preclude a judge from keeping a firm hand on proceedings. In general— |
| (a) | reasonable time limits may be laid down for argument, which may also be cut short when the judge is satisfied that further argument would not be of material assistance; |
| (b) | the examination and cross-examination of witnesses should be curtailed if it exceeds reasonable bounds; and |
| (c) | applications for postponement and the like must be scrutinised for real merit and must be dealt with firmly and fairly. |
| Note 9(ii): | Reasons for decisions must be clear, cogent, complete and succinct. A number of decisions do not necessarily require reasons, e.g. unopposed cases and interlocutory rulings, because the reasons are usually self evident. If reasons in such cases are later reasonably required, they must be given within a reasonable time. |
| Note 9(iii): | Judgments may be written in a style and manner the judge thinks best. |
| Note 9(iv): | A judge may have occasion to express critical views about people during the course of argument or in judgments, e.g. by using unflattering adjectives in regard to a recalcitrant or overzealous party, an uncooperative lawyer, a foot-dragging witness and the like. However, harsh language should be avoided if possible and a judge may not, under the guise of performing judicial functions, make defamatory or derogatory statements actuated by personal spite, ill will, or improper, unlawful or ulterior motive. |
| Note 9(v): | Since judges are fallible and can err in relation to fact or law, such errors are to be dealt with through the normal appeal and review procedures. Such errors, even if made by courts of final instance, cannot give rise to valid complaints. Complaints against judges that are related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling are to be dismissed at the outset. Disenchantment about a judicial decision does not justify disciplinary proceedings. Section 15(2)(c) of the Act specifically provides that a complaint against a judge must be dismissed if it is solely related to the merits of a judgment or order. |
| Note 9(vi): | A judge may in appropriate instances advise parties to consider settlement of a case or put a provisional view in the course of argument. Justice may, however, require that a party be afforded the opportunity to deal with such view. |