We received a complaint about an officer’s conduct during a criminal trial. The complainant was the self-represented accused. The complaint alleged (among other things) that the Officer did not allow the complainant to address the jury on his mental health. On this basis, the complainant suggested that the Officer had discriminated against him.

While acknowledging the complainant’s strong feelings about the matter, we were satisfied that the alleged conduct could not be characterised as discrimination. Rather, the alleged conduct was consistent with the proper exercise of the judicial function.

It is common practice and consistent with active case management for judicial officers to direct parties’ attention to the issues in dispute and considerations relevant to the jury’s decision-making to appropriately control and manage the court.

We dismissed the complaint because we were not satisfied the matter warranted further consideration on the ground that the Officer’s conduct may have infringed the standards of conduct generally expected of judicial officers.

Active case management consistent with the proper exercise of the judicial function