NAVAJO NATION CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
Approved by Judges and Justices and Promulgated by
Navajo Nation Supreme Court admin order no. 96-91on November 1, 1991
"This code also applies to court personnel who are
identified with judges in the public eye. This means that
court personnel who work closely with judges should know they are
bound by the code's standards, and they too should understand its
contents."
-- Homer Bluehouse, Acting Chief Justice, January 27,
1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREAMBLE |
APPLICATION OF THE CODE |
THE
HISTORY OF THE COURTS OF THE NAVAJO NATION AND JUDICIAL
ETHICS |
CANON ONE |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
PROMOTE NAVAJO JUSTICE |
CANON TWO |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
PROMOTE AND PROTECT THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE COURTS |
CANON THREE |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
ALWAYS EXERCISE THE INHERENT POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COURT
WITH IMPARTIALITY AND DILIGENCE IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE FREE
DISCUSSION, ACHIEVE A PROMPT AND SPEEDY RESOLUTION OF
DISPUTES, AND OBTAIN A JUST RESOLUTION OF ALL MATTERS UNDER
CONSIDERATION |
CANON FOUR |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
ASSUME ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROMPT,
EFFICIENT, AND CAREFUL EXERCISE OF COURT BUSINESS |
CANON FIVE |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
SEEK CONTINUING EDUCATION TO ACHIEVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAW,
AND PROMOTE THE OVERALL COMPETENCY OF THE NAVAJO NATION
JUDICIARY |
CANON SIX |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
AVOID AND REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN IMPROPER POLITICAL
ACTIVITY |
CANON SEVEN |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL
ACTIVITIES |
CANON EIGHT |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
NOT USE THE JUDICIAL POSITION TO PROMOTE
FINANCIAL OR BUSINESS DEALINGS, AND SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN
BUSINESS DEALINGS WHICH COMPROMISE JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE |
CANON NINE |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
NOT LOBBY OR ADVOCATE ANY POSITION BEFORE A LEGISLATURE OR
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY UNLESS DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A
JUDICIAL ACTIVITY OR TO IMPROVE THIS· NAVAJO NATION JUDICIAL
SYSTEM |
CANON TEN |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
NOT INITIATE, PERMIT OR CONDONE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH
PARTIES, COUNSEL, OR INTERESTED PERSONS EXCEPT
WHEN PROVIDED BY LAW |
CANON ELEVEN |
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL
RECUSE AND DISQUALIFY HIMSELF OR HERSELF WHERE THE JUDGE'S
IMPARTIALITY MIGHT REASONABLY BE QUESTIONED |
PREAMBLE
This Code of Judicial Conduct addresses the special
situation of Navajo judges in the Courts of the Navajo Nation. It states
fundamental canons of conduct in general statements of judicial duties,
the principles which underlie each duty, and considerations for the
judge to comply with them. The code is designed to give general
guidance, and to fix minimum standards of conduct.
A
longstanding objective of the Navajo Nation courts is to preserve the
customs and traditions of the Navajo people. They are embodied in the
Navajo common law, and it is a source for many of the provisions of the
code. The Navajo Nation courts, as a branch of the Navajo Nation
Government, must respond to the needs and expectations of the Navajo
people, so they will accept and respect their courts and judges. While
the Navajo Nation courts generally follow the state model of justice,
i.e . the adjudication method (where a judge decides the comparative
merits of the arguments of two or more parties), that system is alien to
the Navajo common law. Traditional Navajo justice methods rely upon
adjusting the differences of equals, in mediation and the free
discussion of problems, to resolve them by consent. It does not rely
upon a superior decision-maker, who imposes decisions upon others. It
does not use coercion or force, and is instead based upon an agreed need
for harmony in the community. A code of judicial conduct for Navajo
Nation courts must incorporate the values of Navajo common law.
APPLICATION OF THE
CODE
This code contains minimum standards and
considerations which are necessary to guide each judge, and serve as a
remainder of the high degree of personal integrity required for those
who hold judicial office. It states fundamental ethical principles for
both the adjudication and Navajo common law systems of the Navajo Nation
courts.
The code applies to each judge and justice of the
Navajo Nation courts, whether probationary or permanent. When a retired
judge or justice is called upon to serve a trial level court, the Navajo
Nation Supreme Court, or any other judicial function, the code applies
to that individual.
Only those provisions of the code which are relevant
to the Navajo Peacemaker Court, and the process of peacemaking, apply to
peacemakers. The provisions of Canons 1 (promotion of Navajo justice), 7
(impropriety), and 8 (misuse of office) are relevant to the conduct of a
peacemaker. The provisions regarding administrative duties (Canon 4),
legal education (Canon 5), participating in the political process (Canon
6), and lobbying (Canon 9) are not relevant to the peacemaker's role. To
the extent that the guidance of a peacemaker who is related to parties
by blood or clan will assist peacemaking, disqualification from
participating in a case will not be required unless a party objects on
that ground. A peacemaker is also disqualified if a conflict of interest
or relationship would cause an unfair advantage, bias, or undue
influence on a party.
Under
certain circumstances the code may apply to other members of the court
staff, and particularly those who advise or counsel a judge or justice.
In particular, the Canons apply to law clerks, attorneys to the courts,
paralegals, court administrators, and others who are in close and
constant working relationship with a judge or justice. The principles
apply, because these officials are identified with judges and justices
in the eye of the Navajo public.
THE HISTORY OF THE
COURTS OF THE NAVAJO NATION AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The history of the Navajo Nation courts shows that
Navajo judges have always preserved the essential values of the Navajo
common law, and that they continue to do so. Many traditional Navajo
legal values embodied in the Navajo common law are also ethical values.
An ethical value is one which states fundamental principles for the
well-being of a society, as well as the oral relationships of its
members.
There are three periods of Navajo judicial history:
the traditional period, the period of the Navajo Court of Indian
Offenses (1892-1958), and the modern period (1959-present).
The traditional period of Navajo justice was when
Navajos developed their own special system of law.. Navajo justice is
based upon equality and consent, and not authority, with imposed
decisions. The bodies which developed Navajo values as. Navajo common
law, and enforced it, were the family, clan, and extended clans. Kinship
relationships, with duties to family members, clan relations, and
extended clanspeople, are a system of law. Law is a system of norms
(values) which are enforced, and the clan system provided relationships
which are enforced through shared values of right and duty. Navajo
common law is unique, because it fosters a high degree of individualism,
within a framework of community duties and responsibilities. It works
because of relationships and strongly-held moral values.
The judges were the Hózhójí Naat’ááh, or peace
chiefs. They were leaders, chosen by community consensus, because of
their wisdom, spirituality, exemplary conduct, speaking ability, and
skill in planning for community survival and prosperity. They mediated
disputes by encouraging people to fully talk out their problems, in
order to reach agreed settlements and restore harmony in the community.
Talking things out, achieving order, planning, and reaching consensus
for harmony were the essential principles of Navajo legal procedure.
In 1883, the Secretary of the Interior ordered the
creation of the Courts of Indian Offenses to destroy Indian culture. In
1892, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs amended the regulations of the
Courts of Indian Offenses, and the first Navajo Court of Indian Offenses
was established. The annual reports of the agent to the Navajos praised
the early Navajo judges of the court. The new court system and its
regulations were in direct conflict with Navajo legal values, so the
Navajo judges applied Navajo common law (at least when the
superintendent was not looking). The judges would hear a broad criminal
charge, such as disorderly conduct, and resolve the underlying dispute
which led to the criminal complaint, often ending the case as a civil
matter. They would have the parties talk out their disputes, and mediate
them. The judges referred family matters to respected community leaders
for resolution by Navajo justice methods. Court records show that the
judges applied principles of Navajo common law, often disguising them as
Anglo law. For example, the Navajo customary land trust was a method of
preserving family land ownership, as well as protecting women's rights
to land.
In 1953, the United States Congress enacted
legislation to permit the States to assume jurisdiction over Indian
reservations. When the Navajo Tribal Council learned of a move in the
Arizona legislature to assert State jurisdiction over the Navajo Nation,
the Council enacted Resolution No. CO-69-58 (October 16, 1958). That law
abolished the Navajo Court of Indian Offenses, and created the Navajo
Tribal Court, which began operations on April 1, 1959.
In 1968, Congress passed the Indian Civil Rights Act.
That brought the courts into conflict with the chairman of the Council,
when the courts enforced the new federal law to protect individual
rights. On May 4, 1978, the Navajo Tribal Council created the Supreme
Judicial Council, to hear appeals from any court decision to invalidate
any "resolution, ordinance, act or decision" of the Councilor its
Advisory Committee. The Supreme Judicial Council heard few appeals, and
its funding was withdrawn in 1981. The Advisory Committee formally
abolished it on November 9, 1983, and the Navajo Tribal Council
abolished it again when enacting the Judicial Reform Act of 1985.
Navajo
common law has existed from time out of mind, and through the short
100-year history of courts of adjudication, Navajo judges have continued
to apply it. It is based upon equality and consent in a horizontal
system of justice (which is a legal system which deals with equals). The
law imposed through the Navajo Court of Indian Offenses and to some
extent, the Navajo Tribal Court, used adjudication, authority, and a
vertical system of justice (which is a legal system which requires
hierarchies of authority) . The Navajo Nation courts, as a result of
earlier efforts and the Judicial Reform Act of 1985, now use Navajo
common law as the law of preference of the Navajo Nation, and seek to
achieve a successful compromise of horizontal and vertical systems of
justice. That compromise is a central consideration in a code of
judicial conduct which uses both Navajo and Anglo ethical values.
Ethical values are a reflection of fundamental views of right and wrong,
and it is important to reflect both the values which underlie the
adjudication method of the State court model, and fundamental Navajo
values. That is what this code seeks to achieve.
CANON ONE
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL PROMOTE NAVAJO JUSTICE
PRINCIPLE:
A Navajo judge should decide and rule between the
Four Sacred Mountains. That means that judges, as Navajos, should apply
Navajo concepts and procedures of justice, including the principles of
maintaining harmony, establishing order, respecting freedom, and talking
things out in free discussion.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Harmony: Injustice, in the sense of evil or
wrongdoing, is the result of disharmony. One of the goals of
justice is to return people and their community to harmony in
the resolution of a dispute. The judge must promote harmony
between litigants, achieve harmony through assuring reasonable
restitution to victims, and foster harmony by providing the
means for offenders or wrongdoers to return to their
communities. That is achieved through free discussion,
conciliation, consensus, and guidance from the judge. |
2. |
Order: Navajo justice is concerned with order, which is
related to the principle of harmony. Court procedures and
judicial decisions should be keyed .to an orderly resolution of
disputes. |
3. |
Judicial Attitudes: A judge should behave to everybody as
if they were his or her relatives. This value requires judges,
as Hózhójí Naat’ááh (leaders), to treat everyone equally and
fairly. Navajos believe in equality and horizontal,
person-to-person relationships as a part of their concept of
justice. Obligations toward relatives extend to everyone,
because that is a means of not only stressing personal equality,
but creating solidarity. |
4. |
Coercion: Given the Navajo value of fundamental equality,
it is wrong to use coercion against another. While judges have
the duty of making decisions for others, that should be done
with patience, courtesy, and without aggression. A judge should
patiently listen to all proper and relevant evidence, as well as
the reasonable and well presented arguments of parties or their
counsel. |
5. |
Humility: Navajo judges are successors of the traditional
Hózhójí Naat’ááh (peace chief), because they are chosen for
their individual qualities. As such, they are only slightly
higher than the others, and respect for their decisions depends
upon their personal integrity. Humility is the personal value
which prompts people to respect judges for their decisions, and
not their position. |
6. |
Fair Play: The procedure of Navajo justice is people
talking out their problems for a consensual resolution of them.
A judge should encourage free discussion of the problem before
the court, within the limits of reasonable rules of procedure
and evidence. A judge should not encourage or permit aggressive
behavior, including the badgering of witnesses, rudeness, the
infliction of intentional humiliation or embarrassment, or any
other conduct which obstructs the right to a full and fair
hearing. |
7. |
Leadership and Guidance: Navajo leadership stresses
obligations to others, and creates high duties to consider the
overall good of the community. The honor and respect given to
leaders is based upon an acceptance of their leadership
qualities, and a duty to respect those who guide. While often
judges are called upon to use the adjudication process to
declare a winner and a loser, or inflict punishment upon an
individual, Navajo common law encourages problem-solving and
discussion to achieve harmony and order. Therefore, the judge
should encourage discussion by the parties, settlement, and
resolving underlying problems. The judge should have wisdom and
knowledge to recommend plans, solutions, and resolutions to the
parties before the court.
A
judge shall always act with dignity and impartiality, to assure
that parties have their day in court and an orderly and fair
proceeding. A judge should exercise patience, and use the
authority of the court to decide cases in an atmosphere of
reason, rather than contention. The court should immediately
intervene to control inappropriate behavior, aggressive tactics,
or any conduct which takes away from a fair hearing of the full
case, and takes away from the respect due another human being. |
8. |
Restitution: The Navajo common law of wrongs and crimes
was primarily concerned with restitution (nályééh) not
punishment. A judge should provide full restitution or
reparation to injured parties, particularly in criminal cases.
In addition, a judge should encourage appropriate apologies to
those who have been wronged, and urge forgiveness for wrongdoers
who admit fault and promise good behavior in the future . |
CANON TWO
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL PROMOTE AND PROTECT THE
INDEPENDENCE OF THE COURTS
PRINCIPLE:
The Navajo people expect that those who make
decisions about their lives and futures will be wise and completely
independent, and that the courts will decide without regard to improper
influences. They may arise from family, clan, personal or business
relationships; a personal interest in the case before the court; giving
in to or fearing political influence; or, any consideration other than
the equality of the parties and the merits of the case. To that end, all
judges must remain personally impartial and independent, and act to
promote and protect the independence of the Navajo Nation courts.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Acting in Open Court: Decisions should be announced in
open court, except when the judge issues written judgments or
orders. A judge should make rulings in open court, . with the
opportunity for the parties or counsel to make objections for
the record. While there may be occasions when a judge must
consult with parties or counsel in chambers, they should have an
opportunity to make offers of proof, arguments or objections for
the record. |
2. |
Judicial Hearing: A judge should, at all times, consider
how his or her bearing, (behavior/ comportment/ conduct/
deportment or demeanor) affects the public image of the Navajo
Nation courts. Leaders are judged by their speech, actions,
dress, appearance, manners, and ·conduct, and it is important to
always project the image of judicial impartiality and
independence. |
3. |
Independence and Separation of Powers: A Navajo judge
should consider the independence of the Navajo Nation courts, as
well as the separation of powers in Navajo Nation Government. A
judge must use a proper judicial role to determine the ultimate
facts of a case and the law applicable to it, as well as the
fair and proper remedy in a given case. |
CANON THREE
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL ALWAYS EXERCISE THE
INHERENT POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COURT WITH IMPARTIALITY AND DILIGENCE
IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE FREE DISCUSSION, ACHIEVE A PROMPT AND SPEEDY
RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES, AND OBTAIN A JUST RESOLUTION OF ALL MATTERS
UNDER CONSIDERATION
PRINCIPLE:
One of the inherent powers of a court is to regulate
proceedings before it. As it is with all court powers, they must be used
wisely and well, with impartiality and diligence, so that the end is a
prompt and fair disposition of disputes.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
The Judge as Mediator: The judge should use the pretrial
conference, sentencing hearing, or post-judgment proceeding to
encourage the parties to reach consensus regarding their
dispute. The judge shall not coerce or force agreement or
consent to a course of action, and shall not continue to preside
where the judge is dissatisfied with a party who refuses to
settle a case. An agreement is forced or coerced when a judge
refuses to accept a fair and reasonable contention that there
are fairly contested questions of fact, where testimony should
be heard or evidence should be received, or where the judge is
so intent upon a settlement to save court time that he or she
refuses to accept a reasonable refusal to settle. A judge should
enter an order of recusal and disqualify himself or herself when
resentment over a party refusing to settle will affect the
ability to fairly hear a case. A judge should also enter an
order of recusal when he or she has heard a great deal of
information during settlement discussions which otherwise would
not be admissible as evidence, and the judge is unable to
disregard that information in a trial. No finding of fact or
conclusion of law may be made upon information received during
settlement discussions, which is not developed as evidence in a
trial or hearing.
The elements the judge must balance in this consideration are
the need to encourage full discussions of a case during
settlement sessions, yet disregard otherwise inadmissible
evidence or the stance of a party if the case goes to a trial or
hearing. Therefore, if a judge is angry at a party for refusing
to settle, and that anger may affect a judgment, or if the judge
hears evidence not admissible at trial (e.g. a great deal of
hearsay) and cannot disregard what has been heard, the judge
should consider recusal. While careful not to receive
information in violation of rules of fairness, procedure, or
evidence, the judge should encourage a full development of
information, in order to promote discussion and consensus.
If
a judge is uncomfortable with mediation, or feels that the
skills of a peacemaker will assist in the process of mediation,
the judge should refer the case to the Navajo Peacemaker Court. |
2. |
A Judge as Adjudicator: When called upon to make a
decision in a contested matter, the judge should be satisfied
that all available and relevant information is before the court,
in order to make a fair decision. Where parties have the
opportunity to present full proof of their case, but fail to do
so, the judge may draw a negative inference from that fact. That
is, if there is evidence that would support a contention, and
the party having the evidence fails to produce it, the court may
conclude that the evidence would not support the contention, or
would go against it. Rules of practice, procedure, and evidence
should be liberally applied so all relevant facts, and all
reasonable arguments of law are presented.
The judge has the discretion, serving as an adjudicator, to ask
questions of witnesses, particularly where counsel fails to
develop facts which are relevant to the pleading. A judge also
has the discretion to compel the production of evidence which is
relevant to the case. A judge may recess or continue a case for
a reasonable period of time for such purposes. |
3. |
Counselling Parties or Counsel Before the Court: While a
judge should take care to not unfairly admonish a party of
counsel before the court, or to give an appearance or partiality
to one side or another, that judge should not hesitate to enter
appropriate orders, or give direction, to assure a fair trial or
hearing. Where a party or counsel has engaged in unfair or
improper conduct during the course of a trial or hearing, a
judge may, following the entry of judgment, provide counselling
to the party or counsel. That should be done in a manner which
makes clear that the admonitions given by the court did not or
will not affect the outcome of the case. A judge may counsel
parties or counsel as a group, or separately, as may be
appropriate. Where there has been a direct or indirect contempt
of court by a party or counsel, the court should not counselor
admonish, but use the proper procedures to punish for a direct
or indirect contempt of court. In appropriate cases, a judge may
refer acts of misconduct by a party or counsel to the Office of
the Prosecutor or the Navajo Nation Bar Association. |
4. |
Following the Law: A judge shall be faithful to the law,
and use best efforts to discover and apply any rule of law
declared by the Navajo Nation Treaty of 1868, applicable federal
statutes, enactments of the Navajo Nation Council, the Navajo
common law, or applicable and relevant principles of law from
other jurisdictions. A judge should remember that courts apply
the law, and do not consider partisan or factional interest,
public clamor, or criticism. |
5. |
Bias: It does not require automatic recusal because of
personal opinion, but only an aware and deliberate
self-examination, with a moral judgment that it. would be
inappropriate to hear the case. The judge shall enter an order
of recusal if it appears that bias or prejudice toward a person,
group, or entity may play a part in a decision. A judge shall
not permit any person, including members of the court staff,
counsel, or those coming before the court , to express bias or
prejudice, or argue that the court should consider any such
matter in a decision or ruling. |
6. |
Consultations : Judges, as humans, sometimes have
negative attitudes toward others because of their race, gender,
tribal affiliation, clan membership, political views, wealth or
poverty, profession or business, official status, or membership
in some other class. Judges shall perform the duties of judicial
office without bias, prejudice or favoritism. If a judge bears
either a bias. or favoritism toward any group, he or she should
consciously reflect to decide whether that attitude will affect
the ability to remain impartial, given the identity of a party
or parties before the court. A judge may consult with other
judges or members of the court staff regarding relevant and
applicable points of law, and may receive appropriate assistance
from such persons in the preparation of an order, judgment, or
other decision. A judge may also consult with any independent
and impartial expert in the law regarding general principles of
law which may be applicable to a case. Those experts can include
law professors, experienced attorneys, experts in the field (but
not experts on a question of fact before the court), medicine
men and women, counsellors on tribal customs and usages, or
other persons having expertise in law. A judge need not disclose
the consultation with such a person, but must limit the
consultation to general opinions of law on facts found by the
judge alone. The judge retains the ultimate responsibility to
decide controlling questions of fact and law. |
7. |
Outside Activities: A judge is clothed with independence,
integrity, and fairness. Those moral values become a permanent
part of a good judge. The public will judge the courts on the
personal conduct of a judge. No outside personal, business, or
social activity of a judge should create a conflict between
private interest and public duty. Attention to personal,
business, or social activities should not reduce the time
devoted to public business. The pursuit of a judge's private
interests shall not be undertaken in such a way as to create
public distrust in the judge's ability to decide matters with
fairness and impartiality. The judge's personal conduct and
habits, as seen by the public, must not undermine public trust
in his or her personal integrity. That includes prompt
attention to just debts and obligations, the avoidance of
alcohol or drug abuse, compliance with Navajo concepts of
propriety and decency, and acting in a moral manner.
Some examples of the personal conduct required include dressing
and behaving as the Navajo public expects; use of intoxicants,
except where permitted and in a moderate manner; treating one's
spouse and children with respect and courtesy in public places;
avoiding sexual improprieties, including adultery, sexual
harassment, or promiscuous behavior; acting with politeness and
courtesy to members of the public; avoiding improper or
offensive language or comments; and, acting as a leader who
commands respect by giving respect. |
8. |
Behavior in Other Courts: When a judge presides in
another Navajo Nation court, or a court of a foreign
jurisdiction, the judge should respect the integrity of that
court, and that of judges who have either previously presided in
the matter, or will preside in later proceedings. A judge will
assume jurisdiction only upon a clear appointment, and with
clear jurisdiction. Where a prior judge has made a procedural
ruling in a case, that is the law of the case and is binding
upon the successor judge, unless the ruling is clearly unjust,
or violates fundamental principles of law. A judge who has
the honor of appearing in another tribe's court or tribunal
shall respect the culture and traditions of that tribe. |
9. |
Promote Efficient, and Fair Decisions: A judge shall plan
pending cases with an eve to assuring a speedy, efficient,
prompt, fair, and thoughtful determination of all disputed
questions of fact and law. Due regard should be given to the
right of a speedy trial in criminal matters, and the special
needs of children, the elderly, the disabled, and those who
complain of deprivations of fundamental civil rights. Persons
who may be in jail pending a criminal trial are entitled to a
speedy trial to avoid unjust incarceration. Children, the
elderly, and disabled persons are entitled to have serious
questions which affect their rights or status decided promptly.
Those who seek proper relief by way of injunction, restraining
order, or other specific orders to cure violations of civil
rights should have their cases heard promptly. If a judge feels
hesitant to rule on a matter because of a lack of knowledge of
the law which applies to it, or because of the importance of the
decision, that judge should use resources which are available
within the judicial branch to assist in making the decision.
Cases should not be left undecided when proper consultation may
aid making a prompt decision. |
10. |
Public Comment on Court Matters: The judge shall not
publicly comment on matters pending before the court, including
providing information or views to the news media or persons in
semipublic contacts. While a judge may give public addresses or
make public statements regarding views on the law, they should
be general expressions of informed opinion which are not related
to any matter pending before the Navajo Nation courts. |
11. |
Use of Non-Public Information: No judge shall disclose,
or make any personal use of, non-public information acquired
during the course of judicial office. This includes the use of
any such information upon leaving judicial office. |
CANON FOUR
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL ASSUME ADMINISTRATIVE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROMPT, EFFICIENT, AND CAREFUL EXERCISE OF COURT
BUSINESS
PRINCIPLE:
Aside from the duty to preside over cases, a judge
has the responsibility to oversee the administrative functions of the
court. A judge should supervise the activities of the court staff, to
assure that the duties and responsibilities of each member are
performed.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Planning: A judge should do long-term and short-term
planning, with the assistance of appropriate members of. the
court staff, to identify needs, goals. and objectives, and to
make appropriate delegations and assignments of responsibility
to affected staff members. |
2. |
Delegations and Assignments: A judge should delegate
administrative tasks and· responsibilities to staff members,
assign nonjudicial support duties to qualified personnel. and
assure that members of the court staff understand their duties
and responsibilities. |
3. |
Supervision: A judge should adequately supervise so that
members of the court staff properly perform their position
duties. |
4. |
Orientation: A judge should provide ongoing orientation
to members of the court staff regarding their duties to the
court and to the public. That includes instruction on the proper
role and function of each staff member in the court
organization, and the duty to treat members of the public with
the utmost courtesy and cooperation. |
5. |
Personnel Matters: A judge shall not carry out the
administrative responsibility to hire, assign, promote, or
discipline members of the court staff using bias or prejudice,
nepotism, favoritism, or any factor other than merit and the
qualifications of the person for the position. |
6. |
Discipline: A judge should impose appropriate discipline
for infractions of court policy, or a failure to carry out the
duties of the position. Discipline should be imposed after
orientation on the duties of the position and court. standards,
counselling for minor infractions, and a fair hearing. |
CANON FIVE
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL SEEK CONTINUING
EDUCATION TO ACHIEVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAW, AND PROMOTE THE OVERALL
COMPETENCY OF THE NAVAJO NATION JUDICIARY
PRINCIPLE:
Navajos believe knowledge is power. Knowledge is
highly-valued and continuously sought. When the Navajo Nation courts
were created, a prominent concern of the Navajo Tribal Council was the
education of the Navajo Nation judges. Navajo judges are chosen for
their wisdom, so each judge must undertake a personal quest for
knowledge of the law, in order to meet the expectations of the public.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Personal Competence in the Law: A judge must make a
personal assessment of his or her weaknesses in legal knowledge,
as well as areas of law which will be useful in carrying out
judicial duties. A judge should. develop a personal training
plan, identify training opportunities, and communicate training
needs to the Office of the Chief Justice. In addition, a judge
should seek materials and resources for personal study,
including materials available through the Solicitor, staff
attorneys, the Navajo Nation Bar Association, or other community
resources. A judge should strive to seek out new
approaches and techniques to improve the skill to make wise and
prompt decisions. |
2. |
Assisting and Encouraging Others: A judge will often have
knowledge or skills not possessed by other judges. In such
instances, a judge should offer his or her knowledge or
experience to others. A judge should participate in the
development of comprehensive training and education plans,
encourage and participate in Navajo Nation Judicial Branch
training activities, and promote discussions with other judges
regarding applicable law, court policy, or successful judicial
techniques. |
3. |
Legal Education: A judge should not only promote legal
education within the Navajo Nation judiciary, but promote the
education of the Navajo Nation bar and members of the general
public. That is done by participation in bar or public
functions, and responding to invitations to speak to public
groups. While a judge shall not use such occasions to comment
upon any matter pending before the courts, or render opinions
regarding political matters, a judge should welcome
opportunities to inform the public on the law, and reinforce the
dignity of the Navajo Nation courts. |
CANON SIX
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL AVOID AND REFRAIN FROM
ENGAGING IN IMPROPER POLITICAL ACTIVITY
PRINCIPLE:
Navajo Nation politics and political relationships
are different from those in other jurisdictions, because of group,
family, and clan participation in the political process. A Navajo judge,
as a leader, should vote, encourage others to vote, participate in
chapter meetings, and participate in local affairs. Judges, as
individuals, may exercise their voting rights and have personal opinions
on matters of public interest. However, the public expects judges to
remain fair and impartial, so it is inappropriate to hold an office of
public trust and also engage in improper political activity .
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Political Activities: While a judge may participate in
government functions and activities, the judge must not engage
in political functions. A judge shall not: |
|
a. |
Act as a leader or hold an office in a Navajo Nation political
organization, which includes organized Navajo Nation political
parties, organizations which advocate in favor of or against a
candidate for office or a given political view, organizations
formed in support of any candidate for elective office, or a
chapter faction. |
|
b. |
Give a public endorsement or state public opposition to a
candidate for Navajo Nation public elective office. A judge may
support a candidate for state or federal elective office. |
|
c. |
Make a speech on behalf of a political organization, as defined
in subsection l(a) above. |
|
d. |
Attend a meeting or gathering of a political organization, as
defined in subsection l(a) above. |
|
e. |
Solicit funds for, pay monies to, or make a contribution to any
candidate or any group or organization recited in subsection l(a)
above, or purchase tickets for dinners or other functions of
such persons or groups. |
2. |
Candidacy for Public Elective Office: A judge shall not
retain judicial office and simultaneously be a candidate for
public elective office. Such offices include the Navajo Nation
President or Vice-President, membership in the Navajo Nation
Council, chapter office, and public elective offices of the
States of Arizona, New Mexico, or Utah, or of the Government of
the United States. Such public offices also include elective,
but not appointive, school board positions, and any other public
position which is filled through the vote of the electorate. |
3. |
Resignation upon Candidacy: Any judge who becomes a
candidate or who announces an intent for candidacy to public
elective office, shall immediately resign from judicial office. |
4. |
Other Expressions of Political Views: Nothing in this
canon shall prohibit a judge from participating in non-elective
activities of his or her chapter, so long as any public vote or
expression of views on chapter matters does not compromise the
appearance of independence and impartiality of the judge or the
courts. The judge must make it clear that any expression of
opinion on chapter policy d oes not represent the view of the
Navajo Nation courts or the judge as a judge, but only a
personal view. The judge shall avoid any public expression of
political views, and should take care that when expressing views
on issues of public interest, it is done in an appropriate
manner, without speaking as a judge. |
5. |
Contributions: While a judge may participate in chapter
and other governmental functions, and express prudent and
appropriate views on matters which do not compromise judicial
independence, a judge should not make contributions to political
groups or for activities which are not social in nature. |
CANON SEVEN
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND
THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES
PRINCIPLE:
An "impropriety" is any act which violates any law;
any act or inaction contrary to the duties of judicial office or these
canons; or one which undermines public confidence in a judge or the
courts. It is an act which is clearly improper and in violation of
the oath to follow and uphold the law, or which creates the appearance
of impropriety.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Obedience to the Law: A judge shall comply with the laws
of the Navajo Nation, and act to promote public confidence in
the integrity, fairness, and impartiality of the Navajo Nation
judiciary. |
2. |
Impartiality: A judge shall not allow family, clan,
religious, social, political, or other relationships and
activities to influence judicial conduct or judgment. |
3. |
Use of Office for Self or Others: A judge shall not use
the prestige of judicial office to promote the interests of the
judge or others. |
4. |
Influence: A judge shall not act or permit others to act
so as to give the impression they have any special influence
with the judge, or are in a position to influence the judge. |
5. |
Testimony: A judge shall not voluntarily appear in any
court to testify as a character witness for a party.. The
prohibition against appearing as a character witness extends to
letters to a court or probation officer, but does not prohibit
letters of recommendation for matters outside judicial
jurisdiction. |
6. |
Membership in Organizations: A judge shall not serve as a
member of a board, including nonprofit organization boards,
unless the work of the board deals with the promotion of law or
the judiciary, and membership does not conflict with judicial
duties. Board .membership includes membership on advisory
boards. |
CANON EIGHT
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL NOT USE THE JUDICIAL
POSITION TO PROMOTE FINANCIAL OR BUSINESS DEALINGS, AND SHALL NOT ENGAGE
IN BUSINESS DEALINGS WHICH COMPROMISE JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
PRINCIPLE:
A judge shall not use his or her judicial office for
personal gain. Such includes using the status of judge in commercial
activities, or obtaining loans and benefits from governmental entities.
Additionally, while judges may receive income from investments or
outside business interests, including family businesses, those financial
or business activities must not constitute a conflict of interest or
permit an appearance of a conflict of interest.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Use of Position: A judge shall not engage in any
financial or business dealing, using or appearing to use
judicial office as an advantage. That does not prohibit
self-identification as a judge where normal business practice
requires disclosure of a person's occupation. |
2. |
Financial
or Business Relationships: A judge shall not engage in
financial or business dealings which either create a
relationship with counsel who regularly appears before the
Navajo Nation courts, or be involved with activities which are
likely to come before the Navajo Nation courts. |
3. |
Investments: A judge may, subject to this code, hold and
manage investments for self and family, including real estate
transactions, or other gainful activity. |
4. |
Business Entities: A judge shall not serve as an officer,
director, manager, general partner, advisor or employee of any
business entity, except that a judge may, subject to this code,
manage and participate in: |
|
a. |
A
business owned by the judge or members of the judge's family; or |
|
b. |
A
business entity primarily engaged in investments on behalf of
the judge or the judge's family. |
5. |
Managing Investments: A judge shall manage personal and
family investments or financial interests in a manner that
minimizes the number of cases where the judge should be
disqualified. In situations where there may be a conflict of
interest by holding investments in entities which appear before
the Navajo Nation courts, the judge should give up those
investments as soon as the judge can do so without serious
financial detriment. |
6. |
Gifts and Loans: A judge and members of the judge's
family residing in the same household, shall not accept or
knowingly permit the acceptance of any gift, bequest, favor or
loan from anyone except for: |
|
a. |
Gifts as public testimonials or honoraria, gifts customarily
offered for speaking engagements, gifts by Indian customs,
complimentary items offered by publishers or suppliers,
invitations for bar-related functions, or public functions
associated with the law and judicial office. |
|
b. |
A
gift, award or benefit arising out of the business, profession,
or separate activity of a spouse or family member residing in
the judge's household, including gifts, awards and benefits for
the use of the judge or any family members, provided that the
item or benefit cannot reasonably be seen as being intended to
influence the judge in performing judicial duties. |
|
c. |
Ordinary social hospitality or Indian customary gifts. |
|
d. |
A
gift from a relative or friend for a special occasion, such as a
wedding, anniversary, birthday, or ceremonial, if the gift is
fit for the occasion and the relationship. |
|
e. |
A
gift, bequest, favor or loan from a blood or clan relative or
close personal friend, where the judge would in any event be
disqualified from hearing a case involving such persons. |
|
f. |
A
loan from a public or private lending institution, in the
regular course of business, on the same terms
available to persons who are not judges. |
|
g. |
A
scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same terms and criteria
as to other applicants. |
7. |
Trusts, Estates and Fiduciary Activities: A judge shall
not serve as an executor, administrator, personal
representative, trustee, attorney in fact, or other fiduciary,
except for the estate or person of a member of the judge's
family, and then only if such service will not interfere with
the proper performance of judicial duties. A judge shall not
serve in such a position if it is likely the judge will be
involved in adversary proceedings before the Navajo Nation
courts. When serving in a permitted fiduciary activity, general
restrictions on financial activities apply. |
8. |
Service as a Peacemaker, Arbitrator or Private Mediator:
A judge shall not serve as a peacemaker, arbitrator or private
mediator, or otherwise perform judicial functions in a private
capacity. |
9. |
Business with the Judicial Branch: No judge or a member
of a judge's immediate family may conduct business with the
Judicial Branch of the Government of the Navajo Nation. |
10. |
Reporting of Outside Compensation: Each judge and justice
shall, in accordance with guidelines established by the Chief
Justice, make an annual report of .outside compensation and
financial interests to the Director of Judicial Administration. |
CANON NINE
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL NOT LOBBY OR ADVOCATE
ANY POSITION BEFORE A LEGISLATURE OR ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY UNLESS DONE
IN CONJUNCTION WITH A JUDICIAL ACTIVITY OR TO IMPROVE THIS· NAVAJO
NATION JUDICIAL SYSTEM
PRINCIPLE:
Given the special public trust of judicial office,
the need to avoid even an appearance of impropriety, and the. need to
avoid political activity, it is inappropriate for a judge to lobby,
participate in lobbying, provide his or her name for lobbying, or
advocate any position before a legislature or administrative body.
However, there are occasions when a legislative or administrative
proposal may be of interest to the Navajo judiciary as a whole, and in
such instances it is proper for a judge to use judicial office for such
purposes.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
General Prohibition: A judge shall not participate in,
comment upon, advocate, or permit the use of the judge's name
for the advocacy of any position pending before the Navajo
Nation Council, a state legislature, the United States Congress,
an administrative agency, or a public body. Lobbying the
enactment or defeat of legislation or policy before a
legislative or policy-making body is generally prohibited. |
2. |
Exception: Where a matter affects the Navajo Nation
judiciary or is one which falls within judicial expertise in the
law and is pending before a nonjudicial body, a judge may
testify orally or in writing, or otherwise participate in
proceedings upon such matters. Provided, however, it may be done
only after consultation with appropriate judicial personnel, and
the development of a court policy on the matter in question. A
judge may appear to give testimony, but only in consultation
with the Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation, the Judiciary
Committee of the Navajo Nation Council, and the
Intergovernmental Relations Committee of the Navajo Nation
Council, as provided by Title 2 of the Navajo Tribal Code. |
CANON TEN
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL NOT INITIATE, PERMIT OR
CONDONE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH PARTIES, COUNSEL, OR INTERESTED
PERSONS EXCEPT WHEN PROVIDED BY LAW
PRINCIPLE:
Public confidence in the independence and integrity
of the judge is undermined, and the judge's decisions are suspect, when
there are informal out-of-court communications regarding the merits of a
case. Some people do not understand the function of a judge, and feel it
is permissible to communicate information or their views on a matter
pending before the court to a judge. This must be politely but firmly
discouraged, or punished, in appropriate cases. There are times,
however, when communications regarding administrative matters,
scheduling, or matters unrelated to the merits of the case are
appropriate.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Definition: An "ex parte communication" is any written or
'oral communication of information or opinion regarding the
merits of a case, without an opportunity for all parties to
participate in or respond to the communication. |
2. |
General Prohibition: A judge shall not initiate,
permit, or condone any ex parte communication with a party,
counsel, or interested person, except as provided by law.
Exceptions to the prohibition include administrative matters
which do not go to the merits of the case, case scheduling, or
emergency applications and writs which are allowed by law. |
3. |
Visits to Chambers: A judge should refuse to speak with
any party or attorney in chambers regarding a matter before the
court, unless the judge is satisfied that (1) the party or
attorney has consulted with all opposing parties or counsel, and
has obtained their agreement to consult with the judge regarding
a particular matter, (2) the visit involves a purely
administrative function, such as complications in filing or a
question of procedure, (3) the question to be discussed is a
matter of scheduling, or (4) the visit is for the purpose of
making application for a special writ or proceeding, permitted
by law to be done ex parte. Any other visitor who wishes to
discuss a case should be courteously, but firmly, told by the
judge or a member of the court staff that the judge cannot and
will not discuss any case pending before the court. |
4. |
Recording Permissible Visits: Where a party or counsel is
permitted to discuss a matter by consent, or make a visit for
scheduling, the judge or a member of the court staff should
prepare a memorandum of what was discussed for the court file
and for all parties. |
5. |
Emergency Applications and Extraordinary Writs: Where
emergency applications warrant requests, or extraordinary writs
are permitted by law, the petition should be presented in open
court, with the presence of a clerk of court, and recorded. A
judge should be assisted by a member of the court staff, and the
proceedings should be recorded by tape recording or minute
entry. There may be rare occasions when an individual will make
an emergency visit to a judge at the judge's home for proper
emergency relief. The judge should, in such instances, make
arrangements to record or report on the meeting and its results. |
6. |
Non-adversarial Matters: This rule shall not apply
to judicial functions which do not involve adversarial
proceedings (e.g. name changes). |
CANON ELEVEN
A NAVAJO NATION JUDGE SHALL RECUSE AND DISQUALIFY
HIMSELF OR HERSELF WHERE THE JUDGE'S IMPARTIALITY MIGHT REASONABLY BE
QUESTIONED
PRINCIPLE:
The rules of the Navajo Nation courts do not provide
for automatic disqualification, and parties are generally required to
show bias or prejudice to cause a judicial disqualification. There are,
however, situations which give an appearance of impropriety or
partiality, and the judge should recuse or disqualify himself or herself
under the following circumstances:
1.
|
Personal Bias, Prejudice, or Knowledge: A judge should
not preside over a matter where the judge has a personal bias or
prejudice toward a party, or where the judge has personal,
firsthand knowledge of the facts which will arise in the case. |
2. |
Service as Counsel, Law Associate, or Material Witness: A
judge should not preside where the judge has served as counsel
in the case before the court, or counsel appearing before the
judge has been associated as counsel in the case before the
court, or the judge is a material witness in the case. |
3. |
Economic Interest: Where a judge, acting individually or
as a fiduciary, or the judge's spouse, parent or child has an
economic interest in the subject of the case, or any interest
which could be substantially affected by its outcome, the judge
should not preside. |
4. |
Blood Relations: A judge should not preside where a party
is the judge's father, mother, maternal or paternal grandparent,
uncle, aunt, brother, or sister, or the party is a child,
spouse, or guardian of such person. The rule also applies for
entities where such persons are officers, directors, or
trustees. |
5. |
Clan Relations: The judge should not preside over a
matter involving a relative by clan relation where there is a
reasonable objection to the judge presiding, or where presiding
would give an appearance of impropriety. |
CONSIDERATIONS:
1.
|
Recusal or Disqualification, When: The situations
mentioned above are ones where the judge should enter an order
of recusal or grant a motion of disqualification. Other
situations may arise where a judge may have a past or present
relationship to a party or witness such as to require recusal or
disqualification as a matter of fairness or to avoid"
any appearance of impropriety. |
2. |
Questionable Situations: Where a judge knows of any
situation where the judge's fairness or impartiality may be
called into question, the judge should make a disclosure of the
facts of the matter to the parties, state whether or not the
judge feels such will affect fairness or impartiality, and
permit the parties to act in accordance with the information
provided. |
3. |
Use of Sound Discretion: While the existence of a
personal, business, religious, philosophical, or other position
may require a judge from presiding in a matter, or the potential
of the appearance of impropriety may require recusal, the judge
should not grant a motion for disqualification without good
cause. The judge should also consider judicial economy, the use
of a motion for disqualification as a means of delay, the
availability of other judges to hear the matter, or whether the
ground for disqualification will cause unfairness or injustice. |
|