Judicial integrity is the bedrock upon which the public’s trust in the legal system is built. It is a principle that ensures the judiciary operates with honesty, transparency, independence, and ethical behavior. This concept is not just about the absence of corruption; it’s about a commitment to fairness and the rule of law, which are essential for a functioning democracy.
At the heart of judicial integrity is the idea that judges must adhere to a set of core principles that guide their decision-making processes. These principles include impartiality, independence, honesty, fairness, and accountability. When judges embody these values, they contribute to the effective delivery of justice, maintain the credibility of the legal system, and inspire public confidence.
The significance of judicial integrity cannot be overstated. It safeguards the public’s confidence in the legal system, ensuring that justice is not only served but also perceived to be served. Moreover, it protects the rights and liberties of individuals involved in legal proceedings. Without integrity, the very foundation of justice is compromised.
Ethical Standards and Codes of Conduct
One of the key components of maintaining judicial integrity is adherence to ethical standards and codes of conduct. These standards provide a framework for judges to navigate complex legal issues while upholding the highest levels of professionalism. They address conflicts of interest, impartiality, confidentiality, and other ethical considerations, ensuring consistency and predictability in judicial decision-making.
Judicial outreach is another aspect of promoting integrity, involving judges engaging with the community to foster understanding and confidence in the administration of justice. Judges can demystify the legal process and counter public misconception by explaining court procedures, addressing systemic biases, and discussing the court’s role in societal issues.
In August 2024, Kara Berg of The Detroit News reported,
“The state’s Judicial Tenure Commission, the agency tasked with handling misconduct reports about Michigan judges, has significant racial disparities in several areas of its investigative process, according to preliminary findings from an independent audit of the commission.”
Kara Berg, Detroit News
The Ann Arbor Independent’s P.D. Lesko wrote in November 2023, “According to information provided by the JTC, since 1971 only a handful of Michigan judges have been the subject of multiple complaints. Of judges who have been the subjects of multiple complaints, all the complaints filed were in different years. Public records show that no Michigan judge has ever been the subject of multiple complaints in a single year.”
In December 2024, the Michigan Supreme Court mandated that the JTC provide otherwise confidential data for an audit aimed at examining whether the commission disproportionately disciplines Black judges. The JTC is responsible for probing misconduct allegations against judges and announced a plan in June of 2023 to conduct an independent review of the racial makeup of judges involved in complaints and the outcomes of those complaints from 2008 to 2022.
Although the commission stated it does not believe deliberate racial disparities exist, it acknowledged that the public would have greater confidence in its decisions if an independent auditor reviewed the fairness of its rulings and the racial composition of judges.
Lesko said, “The only way to hold them accountable is to write about them.”
Changes in the Michigan Judicial Disqualification Bench Book
The most recent bench-book for Judicial Disqualification in Michigan Allegan County’s People v. Loew is cited for the appearance of impropriety writing, “No matter the content of the ex parte communications, it is ‘a gross breach of the appearance of justice when [a party’s] principal adversary is given private access to the ear of the court . . . .’”
In a recent hearing for a motion to recuse, Circuit Court Judge Margaret Zuzich Bakker seemed to take advantage of the fact that the JTC is not always transparent with the outcome of an investigation of a judge’s misconduct.
During the hearing, Judge Bakker appeared to ask a question that could not possibly be answered to excuse her actions of misconduct, as perceived by then attorney Michael Villar, now Allegan County Prosecutor, and his client.
This comes less than two months after the Michigan Supreme Court determined Judge Bakker should have recused herself in a separate matter.
Furthermore, The Allegan County News has documents showing that two Allegan County judges have been the subject of multiple complaints filed within the same year, contrary to information provided by the JTC. These documents show that 12 complaints against two judges were closed without a detailed explanation. The complaints were submitted throughout 2022-23.
Another 3 complaints from 2021 against one judge seem to have been forgotten and were not even mentioned in a closing letter from JTC Director Lynn Helland.
Allegan County resident Nevin Cooper-Keel described one of his experiences writing, “On September 29, 2020, Bakker came up to me in the parking lot at 5:10 pm, just after my custody trial, while I still had tears in my eyes, and deliberately laughed in my face to taunt me. I have subpoenaed that video from the parking lot and four years later they still won’t release it. The JTC is complicit in coverup – when I filed a grievance, they just said they’re not interested in looking into it.”
He adds, “I think it’s because it makes the entire judiciary look so bad they’re hoping nobody will ever hear or see of it.”
Barriers to Judicial Integrity
The challenges to judicial integrity are many, ranging from political pressures to personal biases. However, strategies for enhancing integrity include rigorous training, transparent appointment processes, and effective oversight mechanisms. Stakeholders, including legal professionals, civil society, and the public, all play a role in upholding judicial integrity.
Looking to the future, the continued emphasis on judicial integrity will be crucial as social media and technology advancements will continue to present new legal challenges. The judiciary’s commitment to integrity will determine the public’s trust and the legal system’s effectiveness in delivering justice.
Lesko said, “I think transparency would go a long way toward improving judicial performance and bolstering public confidence in the judicial system in Michigan.”
In Conclusion
Judicial integrity is more than a legal necessity; it is a moral imperative. It stands as a guardian of fairness, a protector of rights, and a promoter of confidence in the legal system. As such, it is incumbent upon all who serve within the judiciary to uphold these principles and for society to support and demand nothing less.
When asked for comment, Allegan County District Court Judge William Baillargeon said, “Once again, I would stress that judicial decisions need to be based on case law and the Michigan Court Rules.”
Judge Margaret Zuzich-Bakker and Former Prosecutor Myrene Koch declined request for comment.
