‘Changes in salaries of judges prohibited by 2 Constitutions’

The Judiciary has come to the defense of the salaries of its judges and justices, saying that both CNMI and U.S. Constitutions prohibit the reduction of judges’ salaries while they are in office.

In a statement issued yesterday, the Judiciary also said that judges cannot volunteer to reduce their salaries as it would violate the constitutional prohibition of lowering the salaries of judicial incumbents.

It said that judges’ salaries are protected to ensure that are able to deliver justice in a fair and unbiased manner.

”The Judiciary acknowledges the current budgetary constraints, but both the Commonwealth and U.S. 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,” the statement said.

“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,” it said.

Judges cannot even offer to lower their salaries, it said, because 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,” it said.

“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,” it added.

CNMI judge David A. Wiseman said: “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.” [B][I](PR) [/I][/B]