Judges are a symbol of a nation’s resolve to be governed under the rule of law. Where a country is unable to appoint judges from among its citizens, it may look to recruit judges from outside, in the confidence that irrespective of where judges are trained, they possess the requisite standards of professionalism, integrity, expertise and impartiality to engender, protect and promote the rule of law. Employing the technique of personal narrative as legal theorising, this chapter discusses my experiences as a judge in four Commonwealth jurisdictions – Ghana, The Gambia, Eswatini and the Turks and Caicos Islands – and outlines the political climate, the structure and functions of the judiciary, the challenges faced, and the benefits foreign judicial service bring to the jurisdictions in which they work. The chapter also suggests ways in which jurisdictions can ensure that expertise is effectively transferred in order to end their dependence on foreign judges.

This chapter discusses three common criticisms of using foreign judges on domestic courts. First, that the foreign judge, ignorant of local laws, customs and circumstances, will reach decisions that are legally wrong, assertive of colonial values and principles, or simply unacceptable to members of the local community. Second, the foreign judge, not being a citizen or resident of the local jurisdiction, has divided patriotic ties rendering him or her ill-suited to consider questions of constitutional significance, national security or foreign affairs. Third, the expertise of the foreign judge is no longer needed as there is already abundant domestic legal expertise. The chapter responds and reflects upon these criticisms in the context of the evolving system of overseas non-permanent judges of Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal since 1997.