The Attorney-General of the state confers with the president of that same Appeals Court, regards who to fill the vacancy.
The President of the (say) Appeals Court suggests two "acceptable" candidate judges:
- Her husband, a (say) man, and
- One of her friends, also a bloke.
Hmmm.....
Incensed that her advice was treated as just that, the President of the (say) Appeals Court finds the nearest microphone and sounds off no end about how the Attorney-General has a "bias against women" pointing out that the A-G has just appointed a male judge.
Stunned at this effrontery, the Attorney-General points out that the President of the (say) Appeals Court did not recommend even one female for the vacant position, just her husband & her mate.
At this comment by the Attorney-General, the court President then hits the roof, as do half the judiciary.
How dare the Attorney-General reveal to the public the two-faced hypocrisy, cosy nepotism, and the complete lack of judicial neutrality that seemingly abounds in mighty Queensland!
From the mass pile-on against the Attorney-General, one cannot but conclude that Judges consider themselves above the ethical standards that apply to the rest of us.
Gee, what a surprise!
2 comments:
Ah.......... Where Else but Queenslan?
I'd suggest every state in the land Dave.
The judiciary everywhere in this great continent seem to consider themselves above scrutiny and above the standards that apply to the rest of us.
Post a Comment