Releasing news that Judith Collins has been made a King’s Counsel on a Friday afternoon just before Christmas suggests that the enthusiasm for the announcement may not have been high.
And I am scratching my head about this. Why should Judith Collins be appointed a KC?
I have spent a lot of the last 39 years appearing in various courts in Auckland. I can’t say I have ever seen Judith in court at the same time although I might be wrong.
I do recall her husband David Wong Tung appearing as a Duty Solicitor in the Auckland Courts. But I can’t recall ever seeing her.
Being a KC is a real status symbol for the profession. It puts them in a special category. Many of them receive judicial appointments.
Not all of them use their status to charge large amounts. Northland Barrister Catherine Cull is one who undertakes a lot of legal aid work and who charges her private clients not dissimilar amounts. Clearly for her the interests of Justice outweigh the need for the accumulation of material worth.
The appointment process is rigorous. Applicants are required to “identify up to ten matters you consider most significant in the past three years. Ordinarily, these would be substantive trials or appeals. A major or significant matter may have the following features: referred to by the Judge as important, complex, significant or similar term; is a test case or set a precedent; has been reported or has been the subject of academic comment; a serious fraud or criminal case; a complex commercial or civil case (including family law cases).”
There is also a need for candidates to show “integrity and honesty in dealings with clients, colleagues and the judiciary”. Collins’ involvement with Dirty Politics and especially her involvement in attempts to undermine the former head of the Serious Fraud Office should have given Luxon some pause.
In the press release Christopher Luxon commented that former Attorneys General Christopher Finlayson, Paul East, Martin Findlay, Clifton Webb and Henry Mason were appointed as KCs.
While true there is some background.
Finlayson’s appointment in 2012 was after he had spent four years as Attorney General. Also Finlayson was to shortly represent the country in its application against Japan’s whaling programme and the title would have assisted him to progress the country’s interests.
National’s Paul East had held the role for five years before his appointment in 1995.
The Attorney General before him, David Lange, was never made a silk although I am pretty sure that he would not have sought it.
And other Labour Attorneys General including Geoffrey Palmer and Margaret Wilson who were both intellectual powerhorses of the Profession would have been eminently qualified to have received silk but did not do so although Palmer was appointed KC in 2008 after he had returned to the Bar. To suggest that Collins is somehow a better lawyer than them is laughable.
Luxon’s list mentions Martyn Findlay who was Attorney General in the Norm Kirk Labour Government. Martyn is one person I used to see fairly regularly in the courts in the 1980s. And his appointment was just before he left to represent New Zealand in the International Court of Justice attempting to stop atmospheric nuclear weapons testing by the French in the Pacific. Like Finlayson his status was in the national interest.
Collins has been appointed a KC even before she has shown any ability as Attorney General. The appointment is somewhat unique.
All eyes will be on her performance. New Zealand’s law profession is by far the most organised and strongest trade union grouping in the country. There will be very strong expectations about the quality of her performance.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress