In a family law case, the complainant alleges several judges were racist, biased and corrupt.

20170003 - In a family law case, the complainant alleges several judges were racist, biased and corrupt. Complainant based the allegations on the disagreement with the decision and on rumours. The complainant asked for intervention by the Council. This requests falls outside the role and mandate of the Council.

The complainant was informed such allegations are serious and require more than a bare statement based on conjecture before being considered. Disagreement with the court’s decisions is not evidence of misconduct or corruption. It is evidence that the judge disagreed with complainant’s position and view of the law. As a result, Council concluded the complaint did not warrant further consideration.