GIN GRIDLEY
JUDICIAL BRANCH P.I.O.
April 14, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Judicial Salary Changes Prohibited by the Constitution
Society places justice as one of the highest if not the highest of our aspirations,
and judges and justices are the individuals mandated to uphold such aspiration.
The importance of judges’ work is immeasurable. It is not an easy job and cannot
be compared with any other profession or employment. A Judge must deal with significant
matters such as an individual's liberty, property, marriage, children and numerous
other areas that can have dramatic effects on a person's life. Every day judges
throughout the nation accept the profound responsibilities of deciding who is imprisoned
and who goes free, deciding when a feeding tube should be discontinued, and deciding
who should have custody of a child. Such work is essential to a democratic, civilized
society, although it is often unpopular with the public. Public confidence directly
affects the administration of justice, and any unjust criticism of the judges’ or
court system may weaken the administration of justice.
The Judiciary acknowledges the current budgetary constraints, but both the Commonwealth
and United States Constitutions prohibit the reduction of judges’ salaries while
they are in office. This ensures judges render decisions lawfully and not based
on fear of reprisal or retaliation from any party, including the Executive and Legislative
branches. Judicial independence must be maintained in order to have a fully functional,
unbiased court system.
Judges cannot volunteer to reduce their salaries. It would violate the constitutional
prohibition of lowering the salaries of judicial incumbents. The Judiciary cannot
agree to violate the very constitution they have sworn to uphold. It is the solemn
duty of judges and justices to uphold the NMI Constitution, and it is not the judges’
choice whether or not to comply with a provision, even if noncompliance is for a
good cause.
Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist recognized that the salaries of federal judges
are higher than those in many occupations, but states, “It is not fair to compare
judges’ salaries to salaries in other occupations. Those lawyers who are most qualified
to serve as federal judges have opportunities to earn far more in private law practice
or business than as judges. Providing adequate compensation for judges is basic
to attracting and retaining experienced, well qualified and diverse men and women
to perform a demanding position in the public service.” The same is true here in
the CNMI. Judges have left behind the salaries of private practice.
Jurists, professionals, and others that have a realistic understanding of the judicial
process and its administration, realize the need to ensure that the dedicated members
of the Judiciary have the resources, security, and independence necessary to fulfill
their crucial responsibilities. CNMI Judge David A. Wiseman states, “We hope the
community understands that a judge’s constitutional right to an adequate salary
proportionate to their learning, experience and elevated position should be maintained.
After all, they are the GUARDIANS OF THE RULE OF LAW which is at the core of any
civilized society.”
|