Nome judge who mocked accents should be reprimanded, commission says – Alaska Public Media

Report on Judicial Conduct Investigation: Judge Romano DiBenedetto

Executive Summary

An investigation by the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct into the actions of Judge Romano DiBenedetto has revealed conduct that significantly undermines public trust in the judicial system. The findings present critical challenges to the advancement of Sustainable Development Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which calls for effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. The judge’s behavior also raises concerns regarding Sustainable Development Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Details of the Investigation

The commission, which received a referral on February 24, focused its investigation on two primary areas of concern regarding Judge DiBenedetto, who has been on administrative leave since March 8.

1. Failure to Prioritize Judicial Duties: This allegation pertains to a court hearing on January 8, 2024, where the judge’s actions were inconsistent with the principles of a strong and reliable institution as promoted by SDG 16.
2. Display of Bias and Disrespectful Conduct: This allegation concerns comments and actions that created an appearance of prejudice, directly contravening the objectives of SDG 10 and SDG 16.

Analysis of Findings in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

Violation 1: Dereliction of Professional Responsibility

• Incident: Judge DiBenedetto arrived nearly one hour late for a court hearing, allegedly due to watching a televised sports game. His subsequent remark about “getting lost” was perceived as trivializing the proceedings.
• SDG Impact: This behavior compromises the integrity and reliability of the court system. By demonstrating that a personal activity took precedence over official duties, the action erodes public confidence, hindering progress toward building the effective and accountable institutions central to SDG 16.

Violation 2: Discriminatory Behavior and Prejudice

• Incident: The report confirms that on multiple occasions, Judge DiBenedetto imitated the accents of ethnic minority litigants and participants in judicial proceedings while in the presence of courthouse staff.
• SDG Impact: Such actions directly undermine SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) by perpetuating harmful stereotypes and creating an appearance of bias within the very system designed to ensure impartiality. This conduct severely damages the perception of fairness, a cornerstone of SDG 16, as justice cannot be delivered by an institution where prejudice is tolerated.

Commission Recommendation and Next Steps

The commission found that Judge DiBenedetto’s conduct violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. According to the report, the judge did not contest the findings and accepted the commission’s recommendation for a public reprimand, issuing an apology for his actions.

This disciplinary process represents a vital accountability mechanism. Upholding such standards is essential for strengthening judicial institutions in line with the targets of SDG 16. The commission’s findings have been submitted to the Alaska Supreme Court, which will issue a final determination. The court’s decision will be instrumental in affirming the judiciary’s commitment to impartiality, equality, and institutional integrity, thereby supporting the broader framework of the Sustainable Development Goals.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• Sustainable Development Goal 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
• Sustainable Development Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities

Identified SDG Targets

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
     
     The article highlights a judge’s behavior—imitating the voices of ethnic minorities—which creates an “appearance of bias.” This directly undermines the principle of equal access to justice, as it suggests that individuals from minority groups may not be treated fairly or impartially within the court system.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
     
     The entire article revolves around the accountability of a judicial institution. The investigation by the “Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct” into Judge DiBenedetto’s actions is a direct example of an accountability mechanism at work. The judge’s conduct, which could “damage public trust in the court system,” represents a failure that these accountability measures are designed to correct.
   • Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.
     
     The judge’s actions were found to be a violation of the state’s “Code of Judicial Conduct” and the court’s “policies for respectful conduct.” The process described in the article—from the initial referral to the commission’s recommendation for a public reprimand—is an example of enforcing non-discriminatory policies within a public institution.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
     
     The judge’s imitation of “voices of ethnic minorities” is an act that marginalizes and disrespects individuals based on their ethnic origin. Such behavior works directly against the social and political inclusion of these groups within the justice system, a key public forum.
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard.
     
     The judge’s mocking of litigants is a discriminatory practice that compromises equal opportunity for a fair hearing. The investigation and recommended reprimand by the Commission on Judicial Conduct represent an “action” taken to eliminate such discriminatory practices within the judiciary, as mandated by the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Implied Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law… and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   • Indicator: Public confidence in the judiciary.
     
     The article explicitly states that the judge’s conduct could “damage public trust in the court system” and “hurt confidence in the fairness of the courts.” Measuring the level of public trust serves as a direct indicator of whether justice is perceived as being equally accessible.

2. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   • Indicator: Existence of and adherence to codes of conduct for public officials.
     
     The article refers to the “Code of Judicial Conduct” as the standard against which the judge’s actions were measured. The investigation itself is an indicator of an accountability mechanism being enforced.
   • Indicator: Number of substantiated complaints of misconduct against judicial officials.
     
     The report issued by the “Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct” detailing the findings against Judge DiBenedetto represents one such substantiated case, which can be tracked to measure institutional accountability.

3. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome… by eliminating discriminatory… practices.

   • Indicator: Number of reported and verified incidents of discrimination by public officials based on ethnicity or origin.
     
     The commission’s finding that the judge imitated “voices of ethnic minorities” is a verified incident of discriminatory practice. Tracking such incidents is a way to measure progress toward their elimination.
   • Indicator: Existence of institutional mechanisms to address complaints of discrimination.
     
     The “Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct” is presented as the formal body that receives referrals and investigates allegations of misconduct, including discriminatory behavior, thereby serving as a key institutional indicator.

Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: alaskapublic.org