CONFIDENTIAL
XCC(93)88
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
18
The Chief Secretary announced in Legislative Council on 31 March 1993 that Government was actively pursuing the appointment of a senior Judiciary Administrator. The reaction so far has been favourable (paragraph 19 below). No public consultation exercise is required.
PUBLIC REACTION
19
The proposed appointment of the Administrator, and the accompanying management changes, will be welcomed by the legal profession, the Legislative Council and the general public as a significant step forward in strengthening the Judiciary administration. Some might say this should have been done long ago following the Robinson report. We expect the public's attention to focus on what improvement measures the Administrator will take and whether these will bring concrete results, such as reducing court waiting time.
20
The proposals have the endorsement of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice has consulted the Supreme Court judges. The judges consider that the Judiciary should not be required to give up existing posts in order to get the new post of the Judiciary Administrator. In their view, the proposal to appoint the Judiciary Administrator is meant to be an improvement, but if any existing judicial posts were deleted then the result would be a worsening of professional service. At the very least, all existing posts should be kept until the Judiciary Administrator has a chance to evaluate manpower when he is in post.
21
Some members of the Judiciary have argued that the appointment of a non-judicial Administrator should be a stop-gap measure pending the eventual appointment of a judicial officer as Administrator, so as to safeguard the independence of the judicial process. Nevertheless, we do not accept that the independence of the Judiciary may in any way be undermined by the appointment of the proposed Administrator who will assume purely administrative duties.
Executive Council