Judicial well-being: From taboo to recognition by the UN

Judicial well-being has long been a taboo subject, despite the untold toll it has taken on judges who must grapple daily with the problems and traumas of others. Research shows that judicial stress is more pronounced among magistrates and trial judges, who routinely face intense caseloads and are exposed to distressing material. The causes of judicial stress are multifaceted, and their effects go far beyond individual well-being. They ultimately affect the integrity of the institution and the quality of justice delivered. This is why judicial well-being requires serious recognition and priority.

As early as 1981, American clinical psychologist Isaiah M. Zimmerman presented one of the first and most comprehensive analyses of the impact of stress on judges. He identified a collection of stressors, including overwhelming caseloads, isolation, the pressure to maintain a strong public image, and the loneliness of the judicial role. He also highlighted deeply personal challenges such as midlife transitions, marital strain, and diminishing career satisfaction, all of which quietly but persistently erode judicial well-being.

Four decades later, in 2024, judicial officers and experts from across the world came together in an unprecedented initiative to draft the Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being. It was followed by a landmark act of global recognition when the United Nations formally proclaimed an International Day for Judicial Well-being.

I would like to share the story behind this journey. Back in 2014, when I was appointed Secretary of the Judicial Service Association (JSA) in Sri Lanka, it was the first time I was able to address judicial stress in a pragmatic way for the benefit of my colleagues. By then, I had already witnessed the stress and emotional struggles my colleagues faced. Magistrates and District Judges were burdened with relentless workloads and institutional demands. I had seen some fall ill, likely due to the pressure they endured. As Secretary, I felt a strong responsibility to act.

I initiated a program for judges to participate in monthly performing arts workshops as a way to relieve stress and promote a balanced mind. At first, many, including my colleagues, were sceptical. After all, it was unusual to imagine judges engaging in performing arts. Judges are traditionally expected to embody authority, composure, and solemnity, and for years, they had only attended formal, work-related judicial workshops. However, when I explained that the purpose of the initiative was to help alleviate stress, the Chief Justice was receptive and offered his support.

We moved forward, and the program eventually became one of the most anticipated activities among judges. Recognising that collegiality is also vital to well-being, I organised an outbound trust-building camp, something judges had never previously imagined doing. Such activities were typically associated with the corporate sector. The judiciary, by contrast, had long upheld a conservative image, where judges were expected to be impervious to stress and always maintain a composed exterior. The camp, however, proved to be a powerful catalyst for strengthening collegial bonds and mutual trust. At that time, I referred to these early initiatives collectively as efforts in promoting a balanced mind.

The following year, I moved to Australia as I started serving in Fiji. In May 2021, I came across an Australian radio interview featuring Dr. Carly Schrever. Hearing her speak about judicial stress was enlightening. I immediately reached out to her on LinkedIn. I wanted to organise Dr Schrever to do a presentation in Fiji on judicial well-being, but it was a long shot as I wasn’t holding a leadership role. So, long story short, I wasn’t able to organise that presentation on judicial well-being due to number of challenges.

Later that year, during the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) Conference, which was held virtually due to the pandemic, I listened to Judge Kaly Kaul from the UK share her powerful story of the challenges she faced at work. Her story moved me deeply. I was inspired to do something impactful. Later, I met her in Cardiff at a CMJA conference, and I told her that we would do something lasting for the benefit of judges around the world. I was convinced of what I had long suspected. Judicial stress is universal, cutting across jurisdictions, resources, and roles.

In 2023, I pitched the idea of convening a conference on judicial well-being and drafting an international declaration to Marie Cauchois, the UNODC’s Anti-Corruption Advisor in the Pacific. She readily supported it. I reached out to Chief Justices, senior judges, and global experts, and soon a drafting committee was formed. I prepared a concept note outlining the roadmap and objectives.

Drafting the Declaration virtually, was not easy. Time zones and geography posed challenges, but the commitment of the committee members was extraordinary. Some even attended meetings at midnight or early in the morning. Everyone felt this was an issue that needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency after all these years. In the end, we finalised seven foundational principles, and the Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being was formally adopted on 25 July 2024, at the Judicial Integrity and Well-being Conference in Nauru, with the support of the UNODC.

I knew, however, that a declaration alone would not keep the momentum going. In many parts of the world, judicial well-being is still seen as peripheral or even entirely irrelevant. We needed an annual global observance to remind institutions of their responsibility. I proposed this idea to Hon. Lionel Aingimea MP, Minister for Justice of Nauru. He embraced the proposal wholeheartedly.

I then worked with Nauru’s Permanent Mission in New York to draft the UN resolution. On 4 March 2025, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the resolution by a vote of 160 in favour, 1 against, and 3 abstentions. I specifically proposed 25 July—the day the Nauru Declaration was adopted—as the date to be commemorated annually. I was fortunate to witness the culmination of our efforts while sitting in the UN General Assembly Hall, where the United Nations formally acknowledged judicial well-being as a matter of global significance. The resolution was co-sponsored by 70 Member States, including Australia.

I am proud that Australia is among the countries leading the way in promoting judicial well-being. The research and advocacy of Dr. Carly Schrever, along with the efforts of many judicial leaders and the institutional support systems within Australia’s courts, offer valuable examples for the world. However, even in Australia, the journey has not been easy.

It was Justice Michael Kirby who was among the first to speak openly about judicial stress back in 1995, referring to it as "the unmentionable topic." He faced criticism—even from within the judiciary. Justice Kirby later reflected on this resistance, noting that Justice Thomas of the Supreme Court of Queensland “regarded my paper as one that wrongly portrayed judges as ‘victims’ and as ‘looking for sympathy.’ I was accused of jumping on the ‘stress bandwagon’ in a way likely to ‘release howls of derision.’” This reaction highlights how deep the stigma once ran and how it still does in many places.

Fortunately, the tide is turning. The Nauru Declaration, supported by global research such as the UNODC’s “Exploring the Links between Judicial Well-being and Judicial Integrity” to studies from Australia, the UK, the USA, and other countries has helped bring unprecedented legitimacy to this conversation.

We must not forget that discussions about judicial well-being have often surfaced in the aftermath of tragic events, when judicial officers have taken their own lives due to unbearable stress, such as Victorian Magistrate Stephen Myall and Federal Circuit Court Judge Guy Andrew, as well as the silent stories of many others. This global movement is also a tribute to them and a call to action to ensure that such tragedies are never repeated.

With the first observance of the International Day for Judicial Well-being on 25 July, I am hopeful that judicial stress will no longer be a neglected or taboo subject. It is time for judicial well-being to be prioritised in justice systems around the world, not as a private concern for individual judges, but as a core institutional responsibility.

References:

· M Kirby, ‘Judicial stress and judicial bullying ‘ (2014) 14(1) . Queensland University of Technology Law Review (Special Edition: Wellness for Law) 1–14.

· I. M. Zimmerman, ‘Stress: What it does to judges and how it can be lessened’ (1981) 20(4) Judges’ Journal 5–8.

· ‘Coronial findings into suicide of magistrate Stephen Myall found compassionate judge was overworked and stressed’ ABC New (Australian Broadcasting Service, 2020, August 8) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-08/victorian-m...>.

· ‘Judge Guy Andrew's death a reminder of 'crushing and relentless' workload facing judiciary, Bar Association says’ ABC New (Australian Broadcasting Service, 2020, October 9) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-09/guy-andrew-...>.