Lords committee: diversity in the judiciary must be improved

In its report on judicial appointments, the House of Lords Constitution Committee has found that a more diverse judiciary would increase public trust and confidence in the country's justice system. The news follows statistics stating that the judiciary was 95% Caucasian and only 22% female in 2011. The report is also clear that the term 'diversity' as used by the committee includes diverse social backgrounds as well as disability and sexual orientation.

The report strongly rejects any notion that the supposedly meritocratic process of judicial appointments is skewed toward white males because under-represented groups produce inferior candidates. Further, the committee has set out a range of proposals to improve diversity in the judiciary. Significantly, these include allowing diversity to be an influencing factor in an instance where two candidates are equal (though this theoretical scenario may be oversimplified). Other proposals include making it one of the duties of the lord chancellor and lord chief justice to encourage diversity in the judiciary, as well as implementing flexible working opportunities and career breaks for those with caring responsibilities.

Tellingly, the report also suggests that the government and judiciary should do more to encourage applications from outside the Bar, which still holds a reputation for elitism. The committee did not go as far as to encourage the introduction of diversity targets or quotas, though it said that these should be seen as possibilities if progress has not been made in five years.

The report also recommends that the retirement age at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court be raised to 75, in order to allow female lawyers and those who have taken a less traditional career path more time to reach the highest levels of the profession.

Baroness Jay, chairman of the committee, said: "It is vital that the public have confidence in our judiciary. One aspect of ensuring that confidence is a more diverse judiciary that more fully reflects the wider population. That even by 2011 only 5% of judges were from minority groups and only 22% were women suggest there is still work to be done in this area. It is important that judges are appointed on merit but the committee felt there are steps that could be taken to promote diversity without undermining that principle. It is also important that solicitors, who are a more representative group of society than barristers, do not face any impediments to a career in the judiciary."

In response to the committee's findings, Law Society President John Wotton said: "We are pleased that the committee's report has put an end to the doubts over the future of the [Judicial Appointments Commission] and has endorsed once and for all the continuation of the independent system for judicial appointments. […] It is also very encouraging to see that, while the committee emphasised the importance of selection based on the sole criterion of merit, it also acknowledged that merit is not a narrow concept based solely on intellectual capacity or high quality advocacy."