Top Judge Says Court Reform Needed

By John Christoffersen

Associated Press

STAMFORD – The state’s top judge said Monday that courts must operate more openly, but at least one lower court judge questioned the openness of a task force working on reforms.

Supreme Court Acting Chief Justice David Borden addressed the annual meeting of Connecticut judges amid controversy over a former Supreme Court chief justice’s decision to delay a ruling to help a colleague.

In response to the flap, he formed an 18-member task force of lawyers, judges and journalists to recommend changes to the court system. Gov. M. Jodi Rell has appointed a commission to examine similar issues.

If reforms are not enacted, lawmakers might pass measures that compromise judicial independence, Borden said. He cited a proposal that has surfaced in recent years to strip judges of their rule-making authority.

“I have concluded in light of recent events it is necessary to take the initiative so it will not be taken for us,” Borden said. “The judicial system is perceived as broken in that it is not sufficiently open.”

But Superior Court Judge Richard Arnold said judges have not been kept informed about potentially sweeping changes in the courts. He said he understands the concerns the task force is trying to address, but said the process so far has lacked input from judges.

“No judges have been asked to participate in any meaningful manner,” Arnold said. “The policymakers are the judges of the Superior Court. No single judge may usurp that power for the entire judiciary.”

Borden said he understands he does not have the authority to change the rules and said the judges’ input has been sought from the beginning.

“Nothing is going to be done without full consultation with all of you,” Borden said.

In an interview after the meeting, he said reforms are needed.

“I think the courts are not sufficiently open and accessible,” he said. “I’m just persuaded there are a lot more ways we can be more open without compromising our ability to do our jobs.”

The controversy surrounding former Supreme Court Justice William Sullivan started in April when he acknowledged that he delayed the release of a decision earlier this year to help Associate Justice Peter Zarella win confirmation as chief justice.

Sullivan has since retired and Rell has withdrawn Zarella’s nomination until hearings on the matter conclude.

In the decision in question, the court ruled 4-3 that certain judicial branch records are not subject to the state’s Freedom of Information laws. Both Sullivan and Zarella voted with the majority, and the decision was later criticized by some state lawmakers.

The task force is considering which court proceedings and records should be open to the public; what records should be available electronically; whether court proceedings may be televised; under what circumstances private meetings may be held in a judge’s chambers; and if transcripts of the meetings are available to the public.

The task force must make its recommendations by September 15.