Over the years, we have seen a disturbing pattern: when facing serious allegations of bias or misconduct, judges often choose to retire. This is not an act of surrender. It is a calculated and cynical ruse designed to protect their pensions and escape public accountability.
When a judge retires in the middle of a controversy, the public often assumes it is a quiet admission of guilt. We believe it is much worse than that. It is a strategic move to run from the very people they harmed. By retiring, a judge can avoid the full disciplinary process of the Commission on Judicial Performance and, most importantly, protect their generous pension.
This pension is funded by the public. It represents decades of pay and benefits from a system they are now accused of corrupting. By retiring, the judge gets to walk away with their financial security intact, leaving the victims with no sense of justice. It’s an end-run around the democratic process that would allow them to sidestep public scrutiny and avoid any financial consequences for their alleged misconduct.
For us, a judge retiring to avoid facing allegations is the ultimate act of cowardice. True justice would mean confronting the accusations head-on, proving their innocence, or facing the professional and financial consequences. The public deserves to see full accountability, not a comfortable retreat.