ABSTRACT
The development of more open, accountable, and professionalised processes has been central to the changes to the appointments process and judicial training reviewed thus far. These same trends are equally apparent in the way in which judges' performance is scrutinised, but here the developments are at a much earlier stage. The informal and closed mechanisms which once dominated the appointment and training of judges are still very much in evidence in the arrangements for monitoring and improving judicial performance. With the exception of the growth of media criticism, the work of the judges has remained almost completely free from external scrutiny.
