Justice begins with well-being
Judges and other judicial officers such as magistrates, court commissioners, and arbitrators shoulder a profound responsibility - upholding the rule of law, protecting rights, and ensuring that justice is impartial and fair. But behind the bench, many judges struggle in silence. Long hours, isolation, and the emotional toll of decision-making can affect their well-being, ultimately influencing the quality of justice.
Why judicial well-being matters
Corruption thrives where integrity falters. A judiciary under stress is more vulnerable to external influence, conflicts of interest, and erosion of public confidence. The United Nations Convention against Corruption () , especially Article 11, acknowledges this danger and calls for safeguarding the independence and integrity of the judiciary.
Judicial well-being is a prerequisite for judicial independence, integrity, and efficiency. When judges are supported, they are better equipped to resist undue influence, uphold ethical standards, and deliver justice fairly and competently.
The Nauru Declaration: a milestone for judicial well-being
The path to international recognition began with the held in Nauru in July 2024. Organized by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime () in partnership with the Nauru Judiciary, the gathering brought together nearly twenty judicial leaders and global experts to confront a shared concern: judges around the world are under pressure, often without the resources or acknowledgment they need.
On 25 July 2024, they adopted the Nauru Declaration on Judicial Well-being which recognizes that the is critical to ensuring judicial integrity, independence, and the quality of justice delivered to the public.
Seven Guiding Principles
The Nauru Declaration outlines seven foundational principles to guide national judiciaries in promoting well-being:
- Judicial well-being is fundamental
Judicial well-being is essential to ensuring a fair and effective justice system. Without it, judicial independence and public trust are at risk. - Stigma must be removed
Judicial stress and mental health challenges should be openly acknowledged. Experiencing such difficulties does not reflect weakness or lack of fitness to serve. - Shared responsibility
Promoting judicial well-being is a collective responsibility—individual judges, court systems, and judicial institutions must all take action. - Culture matters
A supportive and inclusive judicial culture is necessary. Institutions must foster ethical environments that prioritize well-being. - Holistic approaches are key
Well-being efforts should include a mix of awareness-raising, prevention, early intervention, and recovery strategies. - Adaptability to local context
Actions to support judicial well-being should reflect the specific needs and realities of each jurisdiction. - Linked to human rights
Judicial well-being is connected to the broader protection and promotion of human rights, including the rights of court users and staff.
Proclaiming the International Day
Building on the momentum of the Nauru Declaration, in March 2025, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution officially proclaiming 25 July as the International Day for Judicial Well-being.
The resolution ties the observance directly to international legal frameworks like the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), emphasizing that judicial well-being supports anti-corruption, access to justice, and sustainable peace.
To build on the commitments made in Nauru and reinforced by the UN resolution, the International Conference on Judicial Integrity and Well-being is taking place in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea on 20-22 August 2025. The event brings together judicial leaders and policymakers to develop concrete tools and strategies for integrating well-being into court systems worldwide.
Did you know?
- A 2021 survey by the with responses from judges in over 100 countries, reveals powerful insights into the state of judicial well-being:
- 76% of judges say they lack enough time to care for their physical and mental health.
- 92% experience stress from judicial work at least sometimes, frequently or always.
- 89% are aware of colleagues facing stress or anxiety.
- 69% believe that talking about mental health is still a taboo in the judiciary.
- 83% say their court system does not provide sufficient support for well-being.
- 97% agree that judicial well-being needs greater attention and visibility.
- And the consequences are serious. Judges say that poor well-being impacts:
- Efficiency of justice and court administration – 80%
- Quality of decisions and judgments – 68%
- Public trust and confidence in the judiciary – 47%
- Access to justice – 40%
- Judicial integrity – 35%
- Procedural fairness – 31%
- Judicial well-being isn’t just a personal issue—it’s a justice system issue.
