Overall, 32% of court judges and 63% of tribunal judges are non-barristers, according to the figures, published by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) this week. Across all appointment exercises, more solicitors than barristers applied (58%) but fewer were appointed (41%).
The figures are drawn from 37 Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) selection exercises in 2019-20 and court and tribunal judges in post as of 1 April 2020.
BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) lawyers are under-represented in senior positions, making up eight per cent of court judges overall and 12% of tribunal judges but only four per cent at the High Court and above. The statistics found that, among selection exercises overall, BAME lawyers accounted for 25% of applicants but only 12% of recommendations for appointment.
Recommendations for appointment for women (45% overall), on the other hand, are roughly in proportion with applicants (50% overall). Women remain under-represented in the court judiciary (32% of court judges but 47% of tribunal judges are women), particularly among senior appointments (26% at the High Court and above).
Simon Davis, president of the Law Society, said: ‘The good news is that the pool of applicants is increasingly diverse.
‘It is however particularly disappointing then to see the present disparity of successful outcomes. We will work with colleagues from the Judicial Diversity Forum (JDF) to understand better the reasons for those disparities and to help make sure that application processes are open and fair, while continuing to provide targeted support for solicitors aspiring to judicial office.’
Chair of the Bar Amanda Pinto QC said: ‘We are well aware of the challenges we face in ensuring our profession becomes more diverse, for many reasons, including to support judicial diversity.
‘The Bar Council’s Modernising the Bar initiatives and programmes will play a key role in that effort. We will also continue to work with our Judicial Diversity Forum partners to gain a greater understanding of the reasons behind some the trends in the judiciary’s make-up, including investigating under-performance in Recorder competitions―a key area of interest for the Bar as the stepping stone for most seeking a judicial career.’
Commenting on the report, Dr Helen Phillips, Chair of the Legal Service Board, said: ‘This is the first time that data on diversity in the judiciary and appointments process has been brought together in this way. While there is clearly scope to develop the coverage and depth of analysis over time, it already helps partners across the justice system and legal sector to better identify the gaps and challenges and increase the pace and degree of progress, something everyone involved agrees is needed.
‘The Legal Services Board will use its regulatory oversight role to drive the improvements needed. This will include ensuring the regulatory performance framework enables us to measure regulators’ performance on increasing the diversity of the profession.
‘Everyone working in this area must assess the diversity initiatives they have put in place and build on what is working well and rethink schemes that aren’t making a difference. The profession needs to increase its understanding of the barriers to entry and progression, and of the differential impact of disciplinary action on different groups of people. It must also develop a programme of activity to mitigate barriers and put measures in place to evaluate effectiveness.’
Professor Chris Bones, chair of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx), said: ‘The senior judiciary continues to be dominated by older white men.
‘Real change will only come from there being equality of opportunity. CILEx Lawyers have already proven themselves as effective judges. Given 72% of them are women they could provide the solution to the continuing under representation of women in the judiciary. 12% of CILEx Lawyers come from black and other ethnic minority communities so could provide the solution to the continuing under-representation of ethnic minorities in the judiciary. Yet today CILEx Lawyers remain ineligible to apply for 60% of judicial appointments.’
The statistics can be viewed in full at: bit.ly/2HaPhlF.
