Fensom was disqualified from driving for six months and fined $400 plus $130 court costs. Reparation of $2000 was to be paid in weekly instalments of $30.
One complainant said the Guidelines for Judicial Conduct don't require judges to be free of personal sympathies or opinion, arguably including any prejudices, but they do require judges to recognise and suppress expression of their personal views in the course of dealing with cases.
"Judges are required to maintain a standard of behaviour that is consistent with the judicial function, and which does not diminish the confidence of the public in the judiciary or bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
"Courtesy and tolerance are essential aspects of the requirement, however strongly held a judge's views may be. Derision, condemnation based on uninformed personal opinions, and the use of pejorative and demeaning language are a breach of a judge's duty. Encouraging public condemnation of a minority group (the unvaccinated) and prejudice against them during a pandemic is iniquitous coming from a judge."
Commissioner Alan Ritchie had to determine whether Judge Ruth's comments warranted a referral to the Head of Bench, or the consideration of the removal of the judge by way of a recommendation.
Judge Ruth said: "I can accept that the words directed at this defendant in my courtroom may be seen as overly robust. […] Every judge I have spoken to agrees with and supports what I said.
The commissioner said the complaints did not justify Judge Ruth's removal from office and he was not referring the case to the Attorney-General for consideration.
However, the complaints had enough grounds to be referred to the Chief District Court Judge. "That will end my involvement," Ritchie said.
In other news, the National Standards Committee No 1 has lodged an appeal against the Lawyers and Conveyancers' Disciplinary Tribunal's penalty decision imposing a two-year suspension on James Gardner-Hopkins for findings of misconduct.
The Law Society appoints standards committee members and provides administrative support to standards committees, but they make independent decisions.
Throughout the hearing in June and sentencing in December, the standards committee sought former Russell McVeagh partner Gardner-Hopkins to be struck off following the sexual misconduct of summer clerks in December 2015 and January 2016.
As the appeal is currently before the High Court, the Law Society could not comment on the basis for the appeal.
In a statement released in January, president Tiana Epati said the complaints process was, by design, focused on issues relating to consumers of legal services.
"Other changes to ensure the complaints system can be more agile, more victim-focused and transparent require amendments to our legislation. We raised this with the Government and late last year the Minister requested the Law Society consult with the wider legal profession on this," she said.
The current law prohibits the Law Society from saying anything about or even confirming complaints involving sexual violence, harassment, bullying, and discrimination. The Law Society believes this needs to change to provide transparency and increased accountability, the statement read.
On that basis, the Law Society has proposed amendments to section 188 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 and is seeking input from the profession.
The proposed changes aim to improve and maintain public confidence in the complaints process; free up resources to focus on the right complaints; ensure technical complaints with no merit do not impact resources; and ensure conveyancer undertakings are enforceable.
"There has been an increase in the expectations of both the public and the profession about disciplinary processes in relation to lawyers and the action taken in response to complaints," Epati said.
"Improving the transparency and efficiency of the Lawyers Complaints Service is essential to maintaining the integrity of the complaints process and, therefore, the legal profession."
