header-logo header-logo

Progress stalls on judicial diversity

21 July 2021
Issue: 7942 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Diversity
printer mail-detail
Legal profession leaders are calling for urgent action on judicial diversity after official statistics revealed slow or no progress in some areas

The Judicial Diversity Forum statistics for 2021, published last week, showed just one per cent of the judiciary is Black―a figure that hasn’t shifted since 2014, despite an increasingly diverse pool of applicants.

In that same period, the number of Asian judges has risen from three per cent to five per cent, and for mixed ethnicity judges from one to two per cent.

In 2018-21, Black, Asian and minority ethnic candidates accounted for 23% of applicants but only 12% of recommendations―a lower rate than that for White candidates.

Half of all tribunal judges are women, but only 34% of court judges are women (an increase from 24% in 2014), and the number drops to 29% for the High Court and above.

While the first full-time CILEX judge took office last month, non-barristers make up only 32% of court judges and 64% of tribunal judges.

Lord Burnett, the Lord Chief Justice, said there was ‘clearly still work to be done’.

Derek Sweeting QC, Chair of the Bar Council, said: ‘We need to understand why, when ethnic minority barrister candidates of Black and Asian backgrounds are disproportionately more likely to apply for judicial appointment, they remain consistently less successful than their white counterparts.

‘Until we understand whether there is problem in the appointment process, or whether the issue is experience―or both―we are operating in the dark. These statistics show that more work needs to be done to improve diversity in the judiciary, not only in relation to gender and ethnicity. More data (and work) is also required on other protected characteristics and socio-economic backgrounds if we are to change.’

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘This report has laid bare the need for urgent steps and we now need to determine as a matter of priority what those steps should be.’

CILEX Chair Professor Chris Bones called for judicial eligibility criteria to be opened up to CILEX Lawyers who last year were able to apply for only four out of 24 judicial selection exercises. 

 

Issue: 7942 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Diversity
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll