ÌìÃÀÊÓƵ

The Hawaii State Bar Association on Wednesday submitted additional testimony on Judge Michael Wilson’s nomination to the Hawaii Supreme Court that raises more specific questions about whether he is qualified and suitable to be an associate justice.

Civil Beat obtained a two-page letter, sent from the bar association’s President-elect Greg Markham to state Sen. Clayton Hee, chairman of the Senate Judiciary and Labor committee, which just last week voted unanimously to send Wilson’s nomination to the full Senate for a final vote.

But the new testimony, which appears to have been the result of a special meeting Tuesday of the bar association’s board of directors, may change that.

Markham explains that the “unqualified” rating that the bar association gave to Wilson was based on negative comments from a number of lawyers “regarding work ethic concerns, lack of professionalism in the workplace, questions concerning the propriety of conduct toward women in professional contexts.”

Asked for comment, Gov. Neil Abercrombie said in a statement to Civil Beat, “Judge Michael Wilson was chosen from a list of six nominees selected by the Judicial Selection Commission. I share the Commission’s confidence that Judge Wilson has the experience and leadership to serve as an effective Supreme Court Justice for the State of Hawaii.”

Wilson was unavailable for comment when Civil Beat attempted to reach him by phone at his Circuit Court offices. A staff member said the judge was busy in court at the time.

Civil Beat also left a message with Hee, who chairs the Judiciary and Labor Committee that last week supported Wilson’s nomination to the high court.

Markham declined to comment on the letter and instead directed questions to Hawaii State Bar Association Executive Director Patricia Mau-Shimizu, who said she was standing by the agency’s new testimony.

She said the association would not provide any more information about the allegations lodged against Wilson, or discuss how the board of directors voted when determining that he was not qualified to sit on the high court.

“We are not going to provide any more detail because then perhaps it would affect the confidentiality of some of the people who stepped forward,” Mau-Shimizu said. “In judicial nominations the board takes its job seriously.”

Hawaii State Bar Association President Calvin Young did not return calls for comment.

In Thursday’s intense confirmation hearing for Wilson, senators expressed bewilderment and some anger over Markham’s refusal to provide specifics on the bar association’s rating. But Markham insisted the bar association’s evaluation process had to be kept confidential.

Markham’s March 12 letter explains that the bar association further researched its policy and determined that it wanted to offer “clarifying comments” to the Senate.

The bar association’s concerns about Wilson dovetail with those raised in numerous interviews with members of the Hawaii legal community, who were granted anonymity so that they could speak without risk of retaliation.

Civil Beat also contacted all 21 bar association board members this week. Many did not return phone calls and the rest declined to comment.

While a majority of the people who spoke with Civil Beat believed there was little truth, if any, to the allegations about Wilson raised during the judiciary hearing, several sources said there were other problematic issues at play. Their prime concern involves his treatment of women in the workplace.

The full Senate is scheduled to vote on Wilson Tuesday. Sen. Hee left 11 days before the vote to allow time in case other concerns emerged about the nominee.

Read the bar association’s letter here:

Contact Chad Blair via email at cblair@civilbeat.com or follow him on Twitter at .

Contact Nick Grube via email at nick@civilbeat.com or follow him on Twitter at .