Keep politics out of judicial system

The gem of Alaska’s Constitution is Article 4 on the Judiciary, a model in the United States. It has given the people of our state an exemplary court system that has not been corrupted by money or by politics as those of many other jurisdictions.

Key to the quality of Alaska’s model court system has been the Judicial Council, which has assured only the most qualified individuals are appointed by the governor as judges or justices.

Proposals to restructure Alaska’s Judicial Council are pending before the Senate (SHR 21) and the House (HJR 33). They would change the composition of the council in a way that would destroy the balance that was built into the Constitution and allow politics to infiltrate the judicial system.

As designed by Alaska’s Constitutional Convention, seven members constitute the Judicial Council. Three attorney members are selected by the Alaska Bar Association, and three non-attorney members are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature. The Chief Justice serves ex-officio as chair of the council and votes only in case of ties.

This constitutional balance has worked most effectively. The record is very clear. Any division along lawyer members and non-attorney membership lines has been extremely rare. In only about 15 votes in more than 1,000 votes taken has the Chief Justice cast the deciding vote with the lawyer members.

There are no problems or deficiencies in the functioning of the Judicial Council, certainly none that can justify drastically amending the Constitution to do the following:

• Double from three to six the number of non-attorney appointed by the governor.

• Newly require that the three attorneys appointed by the bar association, as well as the six gubernatorial appointees, be confirmed by the Legislature.

• Set quorum and voting provisions so that just four non-attorneys alone could make judicial selections.

Thus, under the proposed amendment, the governor and the Legislature would control the entire membership of the Judicial Council. This would completely nullify the balance provided in the Constitution.

The judicial system established by the Constitutional Convention has functioned extremely well over the 55 years that it has been in effect since statehood. There is simply no valid reason for changes that would undermine the one branch of state government that is above and beyond partisan politics.

The people elect the governor and the Legislature, and these constitute our two political branches of state government. Alaska’s Constitution established a system under which the Judicial Council insulates the Judiciary branch from politics.

Should we now move to a system of state government where the two political branches will exercise control over the Judicial Council and thus control selection and appointment of judges and justices?

I think not!

Alaskans in November 2012 voted on the question: “Shall there be a Constitutional Convention?” They overwhelmingly decided not to revise the Constitution. Essentially, the election theme was the Constitution isn’t broken, it has served us well, leave it alone.

Let us hope legislators will be as wise and will vote to dismiss SJR 21 and HJR 33.

May the Judiciary Council and the court system continue to serve Alaska and Alaskans without opening them up to political and other special interests.

Vic Fischer is one of three surviving delegates elected to Alaska’s Constitutional Convention in 1955.