Judicial Research Project

The Australian Judiciary: A National Socio-Legal Analysis

Courts and judicial officers constitute a key social institution in Australia.  The Judicial Research Project at Flinders University is undertaking research, including two national surveys of the judiciary in Australia, to address significant gaps in knowledge about the Australian judiciary.  The project will

• investigate the attitudes and experiences of the Australian judiciary, particularly their own views about everyday work, including judicial and non-judicial functions; work performed in and out of court; job satisfaction, workload and stress; continuing education; qualities and skills for judicial work and retirement plans.
• examine the background which Australian judicial officers bring to their judicial practice and decision-making. This professional, social and personal background will include education and employment history, reasons for becoming a judicial officer, the relationship of paid work to other activities and demographic information, such as age and gender.
• contribute to important scholarly and public policy questions, especially the changing nature and organisation of professional work; concerns about the meaning of judicial impartiality and neutrality in decision-making; and tensions between judicial independence and accountability in the context of encroaching public sector management principles.

National Surveys

A central element in this research project will be a National Survey of Australian Judges, combined with a second National Survey of Australian Magistrates.  Both surveys are based on the first National Survey of Australian Magistrates, undertaken in 2002.  For more information about this earlier survey, please see http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/law/magistrates/   In planning these surveys, the researchers consulted widely with relevant organisations and individuals, to ensure that the major concerns and interests of the judiciary are addressed in the survey questions, so that the findings are valuable to courts and judicial officers as well as to wider audiences. 

The surveys will be conducted using a mailed questionnaire which asks all participants to respond to the same questions.  This enables the collection of the same type of information directly from a large number of people, producing results that are directly comparable.  For example, it is possible to analyse the responses in order to compare the views or attitudes of different groups surveyed, eg judicial officers in state courts compared with those in Commonwealth Courts or magistrates compared with judges of Supreme Courts.  Some questions which may appear more applicable to magistrates than to judges, and vice versa, have been left in, as this will provide data to enable comparisons.  Information obtained in this way will be far more reliable than anecdotes or impressions or stereotypes.

Participation in the survey is entirely voluntary.  It will be a matter for each individual judge or magistrate to choose whether to respond to the survey.  All information respondents provide in the survey is anonymous.  There is no tracking mechanism that in any way records the identity (directly or indirectly) of the respondents.  The researchers have no way of knowing who does and does not respond, nor will Chief Justices, Chief Judges or Chief Magistrates or any other court or government official.  

Information from the survey responses will be reported in summary form.  Quotes from individual responses to questions which ask for a written response will not identify individuals in any way.  Respondents will not be identifiable either directly or indirectly by inference in any resulting presentation, publication or other communication.  The completed survey booklets containing the responses are completely confidential; only the researchers and their assistants will have access to them. 

More about survey design, anonymity and confidentiality of responses can be found here.

Value of the research

There has never been a comprehensive national social survey of Australian judicial officers.  As stated in Campbell and LeeThe Australian Judiciary, the information from current publicly available sources “ ... certainly does not provide an adequate foundation for any worthwhile sociological study of the judiciary” (p24).  A distinctive feature of this research is that it draws on information provided by judges themselves, rather than other sources.  At the same time, it will be independently reported.

The research findings will have significant value to the judiciary, to the community and for government in developing appropriate policies in areas such as recruitment, selection, appointment, training, education and court management, including issues of work allocation, hours, out of court work, working conditions and expectations.  Specific examples include:

• Information about areas of job satisfaction and stress is of considerable importance to the judiciary and the public that they serve.  The survey will assist in identifying areas of judicial stress that may be amenable to change and as well as identifying aspects of judicial work that are satisfying.
• Identification of tasks undertaken outside court sitting, which are a necessary part of judicial officers’ work, is important for appropriate management of court workload and staff and for public understanding of the work of courts.
• Being a judicial officer can be experienced as lonely and isolating, compared with the interaction experienced in other legal occupations.  The results of this research will enable individual members of the judiciary to understand how their experiences and attitudes compare with others on a national basis.
• Knowledge about the skills and qualities which judicial officers identify as crucial to their work is valuable for those who may be contemplating a judicial career, as well as for appointment decisions and for professional development programs.
• Becoming a judge or magistrate is now a career path for legal practitioners from various practice settings and legal employment. There is no longer a single track into the judiciary.  Some newly appointed judges may not have previously spent large amounts of time in a court.  Accurate information about career background and current job satisfaction provides a useful basis for recruitment, for pre-appointment or orientation information, and for judicial education and training more generally.
• Information about the relationship between work and other activities will provide independent data on issues of particular concern for some judicial officers. These issues may result in an increased demand for part-time work or appointment of acting judges, presenting challenges to accepted ideas of judicial independence as well as creating internal management issues.  The proposed research will provide independent Australian data regarding the judiciary on questions where there is considerable overseas and Australian research on balancing career and family responsibilities among people in professional occupations.