FULL TEXT OF STATEMENT ON GILBERT

Statement Of The Board Of Governors Of The Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Antrim
Bar Association, November 20, 2002

The Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Antrim Bar Association is a non-profit
corporation made up of dues-paying lawyers and judges who work or have
offices in Grand Traverse, Leelanau or Antrim Counties. The bylaws of the
Association state that the purpose of the Association includes:

A. To create a permanent organization composed of lawyers and other persons
through which honor and dignity of the legal profession and the judicial
system may be collectively promoted.

B. To promote public awareness of the role that members of the legal
profession play in the judicial system.

C. To promote the effective and efficient administration of justice.

The recent events involving District Court Judge Thomas S. Gilbert have
caused public comment from many members of our community. Pursuant to its
bylaws, the Governing Board of the Association has the responsibility to
publicly state its position.

All lawyers and judges in Michigan are governed by codes of conduct. Lawyers
are governed by the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct. The Michigan
Rules of Professional Conduct address such topics as a lawyer's duty to be
truthful to the court and in communications with others, the confidentiality
of information shared by a client with their lawyer, and a lawyer's duty to
maintain the integrity of the legal profession. Lawyers who violate the
Rules of Professional Conduct are subject to disciplinary proceedings by the
State Bar of Michigan. In fact, the Rules of Professional Conduct require
that a lawyer who has knowledge that another lawyer "has committed a
significant violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a
substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or
fitness as a lawyer shall inform the Attorney Grievance Commission."
(Emphasis added.) Similarly, judges in Michigan are governed by the Michigan
Code of Judicial Conduct. The Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct is made up
of eight Canons which govern a judge's personal and public life. Those
Canons are:

1. A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary.

2. A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All
Activities.

3. A Judge Should Perform the Duties of Office Impartially and Diligently.

4. A Judge May Engage in Activities to Improve the Law, the Legal System,
and the Administration of Justice.

5. A Judge Should Regulate Extra-Judicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of
Conflict With Judicial Duties.

6. A Judge Should Regularly File Reports of Compensation Received for
Quasi-Judicial and Extra-Judicial Activities and Monetary Contributions.

7. A Judge or a Candidate for Judicial Office Should Refrain From Political
Activity Inappropriate to Judicial Office.

8. Collective Activity by Judges.

All judges agree to abide by the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct when they
accept the responsibility of sitting on the bench. Each of the Canons
include commentary that better define the rules under which a judge should
conduct their activities. The commentary to Canons 1 and 2 are applicable
here.

The commentary to Canon 1 reads:

An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our
society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and
enforcing, and should personally observe, high standards of conduct so that
the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. A judge
should always be aware that the judicial system is for the benefit of the
litigant and the public, not the judiciary. The provisions of this code
should be construed and applied to further those objectives.

The commentary to Canon 2 reads, in pertinent part:

A. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper
conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of
impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public
scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on conduct that might
be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and
willingly.

B. A judge should respect and observe the law. At all times, the conduct and
manner of a judge should promote public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary.

Judges who violate these Canons are subject to disciplinary proceedings by
the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission. Other than being subject to the
voters' decision at the next election, a judge cannot be "fired" or
disciplined by other judges or the local bar association. As with
disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, disciplinary proceedings against
judges can and usually do take several or more months to complete. Should
Judge Gilbert choose to stay on the bench, the public should not expect any
"official action" by the Judicial Tenure Commission for some time.

The Association does have an obligation, however, to comment on the conduct
of Judge Gilbert, the effect of his conduct on his ability to serve as a
judge, and the impact his conduct is having on our local judicial system.

When he sought election and took the bench, Judge Gilbert agreed to be bound
by the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct. His conduct violates Canons 1 and
2 and seriously damages his ability to continue to serve as a judge. More
importantly, however, his actions in knowingly violating the law impacts the
integrity and credibility of the judicial system. The public's respect and
confidence in the judicial system has been significantly eroded. Judge
Gilbert's return to the bench will only exasperate the impact on the
public's respect and confidence, and cause additional disruption to the
daily operations of the court. As a result, the Governing Board of the
Association calls for Judge Gilbert's resignation.

Judges are held to a higher standard. Those standards are accepted by every
lawyer who becomes a judge. The standards of conduct that govern lawyers and
judges are not to be abandoned once a lawyer is admitted to the bar, nor
once a lawyer is sworn in as a judge.

Approved:

November 20, 2002 Board of Governors