Drug testing for members of the judiciary

Tea drinker

Should members of the judiciary be expected to undergo random drug tests? given the sensitive nature of their role, and the power we have vested them with, surely we should ensure their vision is not clouded and 100% impartial?

I think the gaurds have this sometimes, and we all now about lowly athletes where the performance could be affected by illegal substances.
Some private companies also have procedures like this.

I'm not basing the neeed for this on any particular recent cases or strange judgements! Honestly.

Akrasia

I dunno about drugs, but there are a number of Judges who are widely believed to be alcoholics (names withheld for obvious reasons)

johnnyskeleton

I don't think anyone should have to do drug tests for their job, except where there is a valid reason to do so. Drug tests are useful in professional sports where they provide a level playing field among athletes.

Also, in the case of somebody driving a car or operating some other dangerous machine it can be beneficial (because this can cause death). Otherwise, I don't think so, because it is very invasive, and if you cannot do your job due to drugs, this becomes obvious pretty quickly.

That aside, I don't see why judges should be exempted from any such test, if it were brought in accross the board. If everybody who works in a shop, or in an accounting firm has to do drug tests, so should judges.

Tea drinker

Well I think there are a number of reasons why Judges in particular, ahead of other members of society should be assessed in this manner.

1. In order to excercise the function of the office they should have a unique clarity of mind. They are dealing with life changing decisions on daily if not hourly basis. It is absolutely reasonable to have some minor safegaurds. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't Pilots tested for drugs? Yes someone could get killed if they screw up because of drugs or alcohol, and indeed they have. (but I'm sure the testing helps) Surely members of the judiciary can ruin many lives apart from their own?
2. Any appearance of ill judgement, amoral behaviour can call into question the office, and the judgements of same.
3. How would it look if a paedophile judge is passing judgment on Paedophiles (or anyone else) obviously he is unfit to hold this position and his past judgements are called into question, with the possibility guilty persons are freed. Taking illegal drugs is illegal! And with painless and convenient testing available, (perhaps twice yearly?) would give a certain degree of confidence for a very small outlay.
4. The weight of the job leaves them wide open to depression, substance abuse etc. Support is obviously available for depression and I'm sure more so than I am aware, as it should be.

Indeed one of the headline grabbing judges in the past displayed some poor public behaviour, which turned out to be the tip of the iceberg in terms of his depravity. My point being drug abuse could be a "blinking red light" over an individual. Why not install the light, see if it blinks?
I wouldn't mind one bit taking drug tests, why wouldn't I expect them to be my equal?

johnnyskeleton

Tea drinker wrote:

Well I think there are a number of reasons why Judges in particular, ahead of other members of society should be assessed in this manner.

1. Do you realistically think that there are many judges that take drugs?
2. Has there been a case where a judge was clearly intoxicated on duty?
3. Should a juge be tested for medicinal drugs or just narcotics (i.e. are you concered about their capacity or do you think they are overly sympathetic to drug addicts?
4. There are appeal courts which deal with judicial decisions which don't make sense. If one judge makes errs due to stress, the appeal courts can pick it up.
5. With the greatest of respect, do you think this is a genuine issue, or is it your way of expressing your dissatisfaction with the judiciary (or the media portrayal of same)?

I wouldn't mind one bit taking drug tests, why wouldn't I expect them to be my equal?

Well I do, and many other people do, and many of the people who would object (myself included) are not drug users. You must also look at the cost of drug tests. It would be highly impractical and expensive to drug test everybody.

Akrasia

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Well I do, and many other people do, and many of the people who would object (myself included) are not drug users. You must also look at the cost of drug tests. It would be highly impractical and expensive to drug test everybody.

not to mention that the harder drugs leave the system much faster than cannabis. A judge would have a much better chance of passing a twice yearly drug test if he was a heroin or cocaine user than if he smoked a joint twice a week.