Judicial neutrality

A Front page in the Guardian today carries a story on how changes introduced by Labour to judicial selection procedure have not ushered in a quiet revolution

Judicial neutrality

The government’s attempt to reform the system for choosing judges to create a more diverse judiciary is failing to break the stranglehold of privately-educated white males over the high court bench.

Although the new rules were designed to promote more women and ethnic minority candidates, all the judges appointed since they were introduced have been white male barristers and most were educated at independent schools.

Of the current 108 high court judges, only 10 are women, one is from an ethnic minority, and one is a former solicitor.

Keith Vaz, a barrister and the Labour MP who chairs the commons home affairs committee, said the system was no better at creating a more diverse judiciary.

“It is actually worse, I would say, than when both Charlie Falconer and Derry Irvine [former lord chancellors] made the appointments. It is up to Jack Straw to say whether the government feels they are meeting the standard on the diversity issue.”

The launch of the independent Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) in 2006 was meant to herald an end to the old “tap on the shoulder” method of recruitment and “secret soundings” among existing judges, which produced a senior judiciary that was almost exclusively white and male. That system, with judges chosen by the lord chancellor assisted by civil servants, was criticised by the Labour peer and barrister Helena Kennedy as carrying an “overwhelming potential for cloning”. Potential high court judges now have to apply for the job and go through an interview, a process more akin to typical job recruitment practices.

But a Guardian review of selection shows that those appointed since last September are remarkably similar to those selected under the old process. All 10 are white male former barristers and six of the nine educated in Britain went to leading independent schools belonging to the Headmasters’ and Headmistresses’ Conference.

Read the full article here

Points to consider:

Why were the reforms introduced?
Does a judges background affect the way cases are handled?
What, if anything, should be done to create a judiciary that more closely reflects the British people?