The Judicial Qualifications Commission is a constitutionally created independent State Commission responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and/or judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges in the State of Georgia. It is composed of two lay people, two judges and three attorneys who, after investigation and hearings, may recommend to the Supreme Court the removal, discipline, or retirement of a particular judge. The Commission operates under rules established by the Supreme Court, and copies are available upon request from the Commission office.

You may file a written complaint with the:

Judicial Qualifications Commission
Suite C
8206 Hazelbrand Road
Covington, GA 30014

YES. Forms are available upon request from the Commission office and also on this site by clicking here. The complaint form must be typed or legibly hand-printed, dated, signed and filed under penalty of perjury. The Commission cannot accept faxed copies of any complaint.

Judicial misconduct is any violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• failure to perform duties impartially and diligently,
• failure to dispose promptly of the business of the court,
• conflict of interest, and
• other conduct which reflects adversely on the integrity of the judiciary.

Judicial misconduct does not include:

• rulings on the law and/or the facts,
• matters within the discretion of the trial court,
• rulings on the admissibility of evidence,
• rulings involving alimony, child support, custody or visitation rights,
• sentences imposed by the Court, and
• believing or disbelieving witnesses.

In the first instance the Commission makes the decision as to whether or not a violation has occurred. However, any recommendation by the Commission for censure, suspension, removal of a judge or retirement of a judge for disability is subject to review by the Supreme Court. In such an instance, the Supreme Court makes the final decision and is not required to follow the recommendation of the Commission.

NO. The Commission is not an appellate court. It does not have authority to review, revise or correct the legal or factual validity of any judge's decision. Such rulings may be appealed to a higher court and must be pursued through the legal process.

When a typed or legibly hand-printed and signed complaint is received in the Commission office, it is reviewed by the Executive Director to determine whether it falls within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Many complaints received do not on their face involve judicial misconduct or otherwise fall outside the Commission's authority and such complaints are dismissed and the complainant is so advised. If the complaint appears to be within the Commission's jurisdiction, it is assigned a docket number and reviewed by the full Commission at its next regularly scheduled monthly meeting. If after review, the complaint is found to lack merit, it will be dismissed and complainant so advised. If not dismissed, a copy of the complaint, together with all exhibits, is sent to the judge complained against. The judge is given an opportunity to make an informal response by letter. Such response is for the Commission only and a copy is not provided to the complainant. After receipt of the judge's comments, the matter is again considered at the next monthly meeting. The Commission may admonish or reprimand the judge or otherwise resolve the matter by the use of the informal sanctions authorized by Commission Rule 4(f). Copies of such informal sanctions are not provided to the complaining party, but he/she is advised of the final Commission decision.

When the Commission believes it to be justified, it will issue a Notice of Formal Proceedings. In such proceedings, the judge has a right to defend against the charges and to be represented by a lawyer. Witnesses and documents may be subpoenaed, and the complaining party is usually called to testify under oath. If no violation is found, the complaint is dismissed. If a violation or a disability is found, the Commission may recommend to the Supreme Court retirement, censure, suspension, or removal from office

NO. All communications with the Commission must be in writing and addressed to the Commission Office.

NO. An allegation of judicial misconduct is not a substitute for recusal procedures, and you should seek the advice of your attorney as to the procedure for attempting to remove a judge from your case. The Commission usually does not consider a complaint while a matter is pending before the Court.

NO. You must proceed with whatever remedy is available to you within the court system to correct any judicial errors you believe were committed in your case, usually within 30 days of the date of the decision about which you complain. Your complaint of judicial misconduct is a matter totally separate and independent of your litigation and will have no effect on any legal decision on appeal.

The Commission normally meets once a month, so final disposition may take several months, depending on the complexity of the matter. You will receive written notice of the final disposition at such time as it is appropriate. In addition, the Commission has no emergency powers and cannot, under any circumstances, interfere in any pending or ongoing litigation.

NO. The Commission is not authorized to give legal advice to citizens or represent clients. However, it is authorized to render advisory opinions concerning proper interpretation of the Code of Judicial Conduct to judges, attorneys, and other public officials.

All active Supreme Court justices, Court of Appeals judges, Superior Court judges, State Court judges, Probate judges, Magistrate judges, Municipal Court judges, Judges pro tempore, and all other state judges or state officers exercising judicial authority, except coroners. The Commission does not have jurisdiction over attorneys, federal judges or referees in bankruptcy and has only limited jurisdiction over former state judges.