publications_unodc_commentary-e

Manifestations of bias or prejudice58. Bias may manifest itself either verbally or physically. Some examples areepithets, slurs, demeaning nicknames, negative stereotyping, attempted humourbased on stereotypes (related to gender, culture or race, for example), threatening,intimidating or hostile acts that suggest a connection between race or nationality andcrime, and irrelevant references to personal characteristics. Bias or prejudice mayalso manifest themselves in body language, appearance or behaviour in or out ofcourt. Physical demeanour may indicate disbelief of a witness, thereby improperlyinfluencing a jury. Facial expression can convey an appearance of bias to parties orlawyers in the proceeding, jurors, the media and others. The bias or prejudice maybe directed against a party, witness or advocate.Abuse of contempt powers is a manifestation of bias or prejudice59. The contempt jurisdiction, where it exists, enables a judge to control thecourtroom and to maintain decorum. Because it carries penalties that are criminal innature and effect, contempt should be used as a last resort, only for legally validreasons and in strict conformity with procedural requirements. It is a power thatshould be used with great prudence and caution. The abuse of contempt power is amanifestation of bias. This may occur when a judge has lost control of his or herown composure and attempts to settle a personal score, especially in retaliationagainst a party, advocate or witness with whom the judge has been drawn intopersonal conflict.What may not constitute bias or prejudice60. A judge’s personal values, philosophy, or beliefs about the law may notconstitute bias. The fact that a judge has a general opinion about a legal or socialmatter directly related to the case does not disqualify the judge from presiding. 36Opinion, which is acceptable, should be distinguished from bias, which isunacceptable. It has been said that “proof that a judge’s mind is a tabula rasa (blankslate) would be evidence of a lack of qualification, not lack of bias”. 37 Judicialrulings or comments on the evidence made during the course of proceedings do notfall within the prohibition, unless the judge appears to have a closed mind and is nolonger considering all the evidence.36 See Jeffrey M. Shaman, Steven Lubet and James J. Alfini, Judicial Conduct and Ethics, 3 rded. (Charlottesville, Virginia, The Michie Company, 2000).37 Laird v Tatum, United States Supreme Court (1972) 409 US 824.60