Why the 2011 Elkin Commission should matter.

And apparently why it doesnt

The 2007 Elkins case concluded the courts policies and procedures prohibited the
presentation of information vital to a fair administration of justice. This denied the litigants the
right to be heard and to rebut any disputed evidence as part of the record. Elkin Commissions
Task Force 28 member panel of respected law professionals and experts provided insight to the
Commission on Judicial Performance regarding the Californias Family Court on the rising discord
the public between them and the steady increase in publics disapproval rate of the Judiciary. In
recommendations addressing the courts failure to provide the majority of the public reliable
access to justice in part they concluded the following:
Part I. Increasing Public Confidence In Family Court
Leadership, Accountability, and Resources Increasing the accountability of family court
professionals is the single most important change needed and would produce far
reaching, positive changes in all aspects of family law. Current oversight of family court is
inadequate and ineffective. Appeals are priced out of the ordinary litigants range and trial
court decisions are rarely overruled.
The Elkins recommendations would be greatly strengthened by the following suggestions:
i. Equiping each and every family law courtroom with automated videotaping
equipment to ensure that each and every family law proceeding is videorecorded,
including inchambers communications, would ensure access to justice and an
affordable record. This is the most efficient, streamlined and effective method to ensure
fairness, due process, transparency and intact (nontampered), reasonablypriced
documentation of hearings
ii. Ensuring access to the record. Access to the record in family law is a serious access
tojustice issue and must be significantly improved both to ensure that parties
understand and can finalize the courts orders and to ensure that the parties right to
appeal is protected. Parties current inability to access the record in their family
law proceedings is an area of longstanding concern. This inability to have an
accurate record of their family law cases makes the ability of family law litigants to
appeal too often illusory.
iii. Family court judges should be rotated out of the family court entirely every 24 years
to prevent burnout and cronyism (Elkins recommendations page 73 #C).
iv. To assure longterm functionality of an improved family court:
The immunity of judges and courtappointees needs to be limited, particularly
when judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted within the scope of their
employment and they act maliciously or without probable cause.