Confidence in the court.

The saying goes that the courtroom, sooner or later, may become the image of the judge--the courtroom rising or falling to the standards set by the presiding judge.

What qualities then does one look for in a trial judge--integrity, fairness, diligence, and decisiveness? People preparing to go to trial ask specific questions:

* Will the experience be impersonal?

* How does a judge conduct him/herself in the courtroom?

* How should I conduct myself in the courtroom?

* Will the judge treat me with patience? Judges have demanding jobs. They are expected to do many things, including

* ensuring they are not biased;

* giving full attention to what is happening in court, substantively and procedurally;

* taking the time to understand the points being made;

* exercising compassion, toughness, and fairness--sometimes all at the same time; and

* making a fair decision.

Their conduct and decisions are subject to increasing public scrutiny. Recently, the American media provided extensive coverage of a Washington state judge who led her courtroom in a Super Bowl cheer before sentencing a man convicted of manslaughter. Apparently the County Superior Court judge had asked everyone in the court to say "Go Seahawks" before the hearing began. Dissatisfied with the poor response, the judge again repeated her request. Since then, the judge has issued an apology.

Should we assess judges according to their every thought, action, or belief? Some would say that the judiciary should not be held to unrealistic and impossible standards. The Canadian Judicial Council is clear on the matter, setting out standards for the conduct of judges as articulated in the documents Ethical Principles far Judges and The Conduct of Judges and The Role of the Canadian Judicial Council (both found at www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca).

Routinely, judges come face to face with the human condition. Coming to these experiences with an open mind may remind judges of their own humanity. Humanity is indeed a welcome judicial quality.

Judges also deal with belief systems. This question was examined in Stanley Kramer's 1961 movie Judgment at Nuremberg, where German judges were placed on trial for war crimes. One of the accused was a respected jurist who, though he did not support the German regime at the time, sentenced a Jew to death for having violated the Law far the Protection of German Blood and German Honour in having an intimate relationship with an Aryan woman. At his own trial, the judge testified that he had decided to condemn the accused prior to his trial, regardless of what the evidence would show. This story frames the question: What does it mean to be a judge and what qualities should a judge possess?

For starters, Canadian judges must be independent and impartial. They are not elected and are not held politically accountable for their decisions. A judge cannot assess a person's case according to public opinion--rather a judge must decide the case according to the facts and the law. We should also remember that judges are not at liberty to defend themselves in the court of public opinion. The judgments speak for themselves and judges cannot explain or defend themselves in the media.

In January 2006, the President of the Canadian Bar Association sent a letter to the Globe and Mail, Le Devoir, La Presse, and the Edmonton Journal in response to comments made during the recent election campaign about the independence of Canada's judges. The President noted that Canadians count on an independent judiciary to protect the rule of law, to uphold the democratic process, and to guard rights under the Constitution. Judicial independence ensures Canadians that decisions of our judges are impartial, fair, and balanced.

When Canadians see judges display courtesy, empathy, patience, fair play, and clarity of expression, they have confidence in and respect for the Canadian judicial system. It has been my experience in Alberta courts that our judges display these qualities every day. Public attitudes towards the courts may also be shaped by court decorum, civility, latitude afforded to legal counsel, pace of proceedings, and practices. While we have addressed some qualities of judges, necessarily Canadians will assess the courts on the basis of substantive aspects of judging, such as the courts' knowledge and application of the law and issuance of well reasoned written decisions.

Judges in Canada make thousands of decisions a year on matters that range from procedural questions to the most fundamental interests of those appearing before them. The courts are not only assessed on the quality of the justice that they dispense, but also on how the administration of justice is conducted. Canadian judges are deeply aware of this responsibility and take it very seriously. This attitude is reflected in worldwide admiration for the Canadian judiciary and in frequent requests to provide expertise and direction to developing nations.

As a participant in both French and English court proceedings, I believe that Canadians can and do have confidence in our judges and in our judicial system.

Teresa Haykowsky is a lawyer with the firm of McLennan Ross LLP in Edmonton, Alberta.