The judges are the custodians on well implementing of the law to guarantee the rights which considered the basis of building the community and justice prevails. Therefore, the judge’s conduct whether in their occupation or outside it according to the level of trust they hold, and the law imposes a commitment on judges as same as the employee’s duties or whom in charge with a public service in the different sectors of the State, considering that the judge is assigned to present the public service. Moreover, the judicial position imposes commitments on judges to achieve a guarantee of the honor and integrity of the work of the judiciary, including its commitment to exert adequate care to avoid mistake, or he will be exposed to accountability which regarded the actual base for the legal system, here we ask: what is the value of law if not guaranteeing mistaken accountability?
In countries that respect the law, all people are submitted to rule of law, whether from members of the executive and legislative authority or judicial power which should be the first power that submitted to rule of law because it is the body whose in charge of implementing it. But judges’ accountability is different from the accountability of the executive and legislative authorities members because of judges’ work nature, the independence and neutrality they should enjoy. Therefore, the mechanism of accounting the judges for mistakes they made should not lead to affect this independence and neutrality. We will find that the law is providing the aforementioned immunity for judges, whereas article (64) of Judicial Organization Law No. (160) for 1979 the impossibility of detaining or taking criminal procedures against him unless he perpetrated a witnessed crime after acquiring the permission from the Head of the Supreme Judicial Council, but this immunity is not absolute and the judges could be accounted for every conduct may form of constitution and law violation, beside the conducts of negligence which may be made by them while they exercising the judicial work.
The judge’s penalty could reach service termination according to provisions of article (58/3rd) of the Judicial Organization Law if a decisive decision issued against him from a specialized court of conduct never meets with the judicial occupation’s honor. Moreover, article (61/1st) of the aforementioned law clarified that the judges’ affairs committee decides to refer the judge to the specialist court if it found that ascribed conduct to him is a criminal or demeanor, therefore, we find that the judge is like any the other people exposed to the criminal accountability when he perpetrates any criminal conduct according to the Penal Law and the other laws, for example, article (234) of Penal Law No. (111) for 1969 which punish the judge with imprisonment of fine if he issued an unfair decision. The judge has submitted as well as the other employees or who charged with a public service according to the provisions of article (329/1) of Penal Law if his judgment caused a deactivating a ruling of a valid constitutional or legal text. He is submitted to the provisions of article (330) of the aforementioned law if he intentionally contravened a duty of his occupation duties. We find that these legal texts and else which implemented on judges for their conducts that violates the constitution and the law and implementing it seriously. This matter will contribute to citizen’s confidence in the judiciary because when the citizen sees that the judge is might be punished for conduct he perpetrated and violates the constitution and the law, the confidence in the justice of the judiciary will increase. But if the judge was in safe of his violation of the constitution and the law consequences just because he is a judge, this will lead to the decline of confidence in the judiciary, because who in charge are not committed by the rule of the constitution and the law, so, how could to trust their implementation of the law and the constitution to others?
The duty of (respecting the Constitution and the Law and in effect laws, implanting it honestly and neutrally) is the base on which the Judiciary work relies, therefore, we find that the legislator was keen to include this text on this commitment in the form of the oath which performed by the judge before exercising his judicial work according to the article (37/2nd) of the judicial organizing law number (160) for 1979, and the article (7) of the order number (30) for 2005 (the Federal Supreme Court Law). I address my call with love and care to all my female and male colleagues of judges to bear in mind that justice is one of the names of God and a dome of his light. Achieving justice is a base of all prophets and messengers sent by God in the Holy Quran and balance. By the judiciary, blood, funds, and honors are protected. The sovereignty of the Judiciary is the highest in position, the greatest, and the most honorable when mentioned. Therefore, all judges shall keep themselves away from any conduct that may violate the Constitution and the Law.
Faiq Zidan [ Judge Supreme Judicial Council]
13 December 2020