BACKGROUND:THE SYSTEM of judicial appointments in the UK was radically overhauled earlier this century following sustained criticism of the existing system, based on a "tap on the shoulder", which critics maintained tended to self-perpetuate a white, male-dominated privileged elite in the judiciary.
In 2006 a judicial appointments commission for England and Wales was set up to take over the system of judicial appointments from the lord chancellor and the UK department for constitutional affairs.
Similar bodies were set up to perform the same function in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The bodies are made up of a mixture of judges and lay people.
Candidates seeking judicial office must submit a written application and shortlisted candidates are interviewed. The criteria against which they are judged are: intellectual capacity; personal qualities (integrity, independence, judgment, decisiveness, objectivity, ability, willingness to learn); ability to understand and deal fairly; authority and communication skills; and efficiency.
Candidates must supply the names of referees or “consultees” who can be asked about their abilities.
Prof Dame Hazel Genn QC of University College London, the author of a report on the system for the directorate of judicial offices for England and Wales, said the new system appeared to be working well.
“It was a bit of a culture change, quite a tough change. Everyone, up to applicants for the presidency of the supreme court, has to submit an application letter and self-assessment, looking at the selection criteria and how you demonstrate those qualities. Everyone is interviewed.”
She acknowledged that when the new system came in there were fears it would undermine the quality of the judiciary but this proved unfounded. “We have a wider variety of applicants now. It is important that you make the selection criteria clear,” she said.
There were also some concerns about the confidentiality of the new system, given its more transparent nature. “The profession is very gossipy. People will have to be more careful. In the end it’s something that people have to get over, and as people develop trust in the system that changes. It is important to encourage very senior people to apply.”
Similar fears were expressed about the Northern Ireland judicial appointments commission but a report commissioned by it from the law department in Queen’s University Belfast found its advantages far outweighed its disadvantages.
It found the new system encouraged a wider range of applicants for judicial office. “Candidates who did not have the more usual bar-oriented background were being successful in appointments. This was leading to these individuals being seen as role models for others wishing [to take up] a judicial career,” it said.
Solicitors and barristers in the public sector were particularly positive about it, as they tended to be more used to competence-based assessment. This was viewed more suspiciously by those in private practice.
While the new system was generally considered to be working well with appointments to the lower jurisdictions, it was seen as much less successful in overcoming traditional barriers and encouraging non-traditional candidates for high court appointments, where no women had been appointed, it said.