is a possible conflict of administrative interests since almost all the
work of the Tribunal is physically done in the District Court by District Judges temporarily assuming the roles of Presiding Officers of
the Tribunal. This difficulty would be removed if that body of work
now done by District Judges were returned to the jurisdiction of the District Court (see Chapter VIII).
10.
The Senior Master is in the proposed hierarchy as leading judicial officer and not administrator. Jan proposing the appointment
of an Administrator for the Judiciary and will describe his role and
functions later in this chapter.
11.
On the question of the status of presiders there are three
possible options :-
(1) an informal appointment and no special pay;
(2)
a formal appointment and no special pay; (3) a formal appointment and special pay.
There is always
There are cost
the nature of a
Fully effective implementation of my proposals would require the third option. A number of difficulties have been put to me. a difficulty about creating intermediary pay points. implications. Some judges are also concerned about transfer of power and the question of irremovability.
that improved performance and reduced cost will flow from these
proposals because there will be considerably better use of judicial
time and that the Chief Justice will remain in charge and accessible.
12.
My advice is
I therefore recommend that presiders be specially appointed
as such with their own new ranks in the judicial hierarchy and with
special pay. Appointment as President of the Lands Tribunal will not carry additional status or pay beyond that of High Court Judge which
the appointee will already hold. The Chief Magistrate already has
special status and pay but it fits better with my recommendations to
pay him as a District Judge. The Senior Master's present position is
not out of line with the recommendation. The Chief Presiding Officer
- 23