By E. LEO MILONAS

New York's chief administrative judge, Jonathan Lippman, named two new administrators on Monday - one to oversee courts statewide, one to oversee Brooklyn's troubled courts - to help "restore public confidence" in the legal system. It's a welcome step, but it leaves unanswered a larger question, one beyond Lippman's jurisdiction: How should New York choose its judges? Should they be appointed or elected?

The question takes on added urgency because of news reports of three Brooklyn judges already indicted or removed from the bench and an ongoing investigation into the entire judicial selection process in that borough. It would be unfair to argue that the current system of electing judges is entirely to blame for this corruption or that it hasn't produced many highly qualified judges. But voters, with scant information available on the candidates, usually vote for judges simply on party affiliation. That gives the party bosses far too much control.

The New York City Bar Association firmly believes merit selection based on nonpartisan screening committees is the best way to select judges. Under merit selection, candidates don't need to solicit funds from attorneys who may appear before them, nor are they bound by a system that often favors political connections over qualifications. But realistically getting merit selection adopted is a lengthy process, made all the more difficult by the resistance of legislators and party faithful. Protecting democracy and the integrity of our courts can't wait that long. Therefore, the city bar recommends taking immediate steps to improve the current system.

Currently, most boroughs have judicial screening committees to review candidates before party leaders place them on the ballot. But many of these committees, particularly those outside Manhattan, often simply rubberstamp the nominations of party bosses. To correct this, we need independent screening committees composed in such a way that no one official can dominate them. Committee members should include lawyers and community leaders who feel free to vote independently.

The committee should actively seek out candidates, including those outside the political sphere. No more than three candidates should be reported out of the committee for each vacancy, and the political leaders should pledge to select nominees only from those candidates. If a judge comes up for reelection and is found qualified by the screening committee, the committee should forward that name only. This will allow independent jurists to refuse to hire or give lucrative appointments to party favorites to remain on the bench.

If the current judicial corruption scandal is to lead to more than angry newspaper editorials, we need to harness the outrage into these productive reforms.

Milonas is president of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.

Daily News
November 12, 2003