The Lawyers for Public Mandate (LPM) Organization has defended the government’s proposed judicial reforms, alleging that politicians facing unresolved corruption cases are attempting to portray the legislation as a threat to judicial independence.

Speaking at a media briefing, Attorneys representing the National People’s Power (NPP) affiliated lawyers’ organization said the Cabinet-approved proposal would increase the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 and Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65.

Under the proposal, the Chief Justice would serve until the age of 67 or for six years from the date of appointment, whichever comes first.

The retirement age of High Court judges would be increased from 61 to 63, while Magistrates and District Judges would retire at 62 instead of 60.

The attorneys said similar retirement ages are found in several other countries, noting that judges retire at 70 in Australia and Denmark, at 75 in Canada and Brazil, while the United States has no mandatory retirement age for federal judges.

They also cited the views of American jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., saying judicial experience is an important asset that strengthens the legal system.

According to the LPM, the proposed changes are intended to help reduce delays in the courts and support the government’s broader judicial and anti-corruption reform agenda.

The reforms are aimed at addressing the longstanding shortage of judges and the resulting case backlog, they said.

They noted that although 110 High Court positions have been approved, only 93 are currently filled, adding that additional courts and judicial officers are also required.

The group also rejected claims that the amendment was designed to benefit any individual judge, alleging that politicians facing corruption investigations were attempting to undermine the proposal by presenting it as a threat to the independence of the judiciary. (Newswire)

The post NPP-affiliated lawyers defend judicial reform proposal appeared first on Newswire.