EDITORIAL
State Supreme Court needs resources, focus

A remarkable look at the inner workings and personalities of one of the most powerful public bodies in the state, beginning today, is a must read for anyone concerned about Hawai'i and its future.

The article, first of several by staff writer Lynda Arakawa, delves into the Hawai'i Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice Ronald Moon.

Perhaps the most striking finding in the series is the fact that the court's backlog has been steadily growing. Whether that is a reflection of the court's work habits (a theory few are willing to believe) or the increasing complexity of cases is anyone's guess.

To some degree, the increase in court congestion is due to the natural growth of our state, an increasing number of lawyers and the growing inclination of claimants to use the appeals process. It is also not new; it dates back to World War II.

All that is of small comfort, however. As Arakawa's article points out, the past several years have seen an increase in the amount of time it takes for claimants to get resolution from the highest court in the state.

Reputation suffering

That isn't good in practical terms. And it isn't good for the overall reputation of the justice system. The old saying that justice delayed is justice denied has new meaning when a person has to wait, in some cases for years, for an answer from the court.

Some suggest in Arakawa's first article that the relative slowness of the court is due in part to dissent among the five justices. That dissent, more often than not involving Justice Simeon Acoba, has occasionally boiled into the open.

But no one should expect, or even want, the top appeals court to be a well-oiled machine in which five justices think as one. One of the beauties of the system is that it brings different points of view and different legal ideologies to bear on a single issue.

And don't kid yourself. There has often been more than a fair measure of dissent and disagreement on the court, under Moon and under previous chief justices before him.

One unfortunate result of the backlog of 375 cases and the court's effort to cut that number has been the increasing use of so-called memorandum opinions, which are not published in the law books and which establish no precedent.

That means the individual case is resolved, but lawyers and lower-court judges cannot draw any lessons or legal guidance from them.

This issue is not new to the Moon court. It was one of the major criticisms leveled against the court under the leadership of Chief Justice Herman Lum. That criticism led directly to the creation of an Intermediate Court of Appeals by the 1978 Constitutional Convention.

That Intermediate Court was designed precisely to take some of the work off the back of the Supreme Court so it could be more selective and focus more energy on writing decisional law.

Fewer oral arguments

Another unfortunate result of the attempt to speed up the process is the declining number of times when the court hears oral arguments. This again denies both the public and the legal community an opportunity to see and understand how the court works.

The first response to this situation, obviously, is a plea for more resources, more judges and more staff and research help. And surely this would help.

But the Judiciary faces the same problem that plagues other branches of government: The state budget can handle only so much growth.

So while more resources are obviously important, so too is the approach the court uses in deciding where it will apply its formidable power.

This could include reviewing policies and practices used in selecting cases to hear on appeal with an eye on focusing toward those cases that raise the most fundamental issues. In turn, that implies shifting more cases to an already hard-working Intermediate Court of Appeals. It might even include redefining the scope of work of the Intermediate Court.

The Hawai'i Judiciary for some time has been worrying about the "transparency" of its operations and whether the public understands and appreciates what it does.

Focus on biggest issues

One big step the high court could take is to focus its work with laser-like sharpness on the biggest issues that affect the most people, and then give those matters full and open attention through oral hearings and complete written opinions.

The Moon court has worked extremely hard and has deftly handled some of the most contentious issues our society has to offer, such as water rights, same-sex marriage and Hawaiian gathering rights.

Hawai'i deserves that same high quality of review on every case the Supreme Court decides to accept.