Appointment to the UK Supreme Court PDF

Preview

Summary

Brief description of the appointment process to the UK Supreme Court....

Description

Judicial appointment to the U.K. Supreme Court The current system was created by CRA (Constitutional Reform Act 2005) Established an independent Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) for England and Wales (similar ones in Scotland and NI) Recommends candidates in case of vacancies Reflects the principle of judicial independence, transparency, effectiveness, diversity and accountability

The appointments process prior to the CRA : Used to be exclusively in the hands of the executive Judges were formally appointed by the Queen, acting on the advice of his/her ministers or the Lord Chancelor Scotland: Lord Advocate makes recommendations to the Secretary of State for Scotland No open competitions, the Lord Chancellor decided whom to recommend for appointment after private consultations with the judiciary and senior members of the profession Created ‘widespread public concern that judges were being appointed through cronyism and secret soundings’ Failed to satisfy fundamental principles

The process for appointing judges under the CRA : JAC now exists in each of the UK’s juridiction These operate at arm’s length from government ministers Carry out selection exercises when judicial vacancies arise and identify a single nominee, gives them to the relevant minister, who can accept it but has limited power to ask to reconsider or reject Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales Independent body consisting of fifteen body The Chair must be a lay person, five judges, two practicing lawyers, five lay members, a legal tribunal member and a lay magistrate Appointed by the Crown on the advice of Lord Chancellor 3 of the judges are selected by the Judges Council Shows self-governance of the judiciary and thereby contributes to its independance

The selection process for Judges in England and Wales

Interviews, written tests and role play Once JAC has arrive to a selection decision : - reports it to the LC if it is to the High Court or above - To the Lord Chief of Justice for appointments to courts - To the Senior President of Tribunals for appointments to tribunals In practice, almost all recommendations are accepted The person is then appointed Appointments to the UK Supreme Court Justices of the Supreme Court (President, deputy president,...) are appointed by the Queen (ss 25-31 CRA) Qualifications : has held judicial office for at least 2Y or has been qualifying practitioner for at least 15Y (s.25(1)) Acts on recommendation of the PM (s.26(1)), who usually recommends the same as the LC The real decision is in fact made by the Supreme Court Selection Commission and the LC SCSC: not a permanent body (workload to light), a commission is convened when required Consists of the President of the Supreme Court, a senior judge, a member of the JAC, a member of the Judicial Appointments board of Scotland, one member of the NI Judicial Appointments Commission, at least one of them must be a non-lawyer Commission’s initial selection task : compile a shortlist of candidates for the applicants, then conducts a confidential consultation exercise (s.27) Selection must be based on merit (s.27(5)). However, there are no special criterias. Must have regard to any guidance given by the LC (s.27(10)). When they have a nominee, report is name to the LC, then second round of consultation, before the LC rejects or accepts/ask the commission to reconsider. Once the selection is complete, LC notifies PM, who passes recommendation to the Queen, who makes the formal appointment Before, when vacancies arose, it wasn’t advertised so no one could applied Now, it is always advertised.

Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (JACO) : Provides redress for those dissatisfied with the way they were treated during a selection process Independent oversight of the process Appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the LC Cannot have been a judge or a practitioner May have been : civil servant, MP, member of the JAC, politician,...

Reports findings or recommendations to LC, JAC and complainant Ombudsman can also investigate matters referred by the LC relating to the appointments process

The need to make appointments based on merit and the need for diversity : JAC is under statutory duty to select people of good character solely on merit They also must ‘have regard to’ the need to ‘encourage diversity in the range of persons available for the selection’ (s.64) Must have the abilities and qualities necessary to be a judge, but as ‘merit’ is not defined by the CRA, the qualities change over the years. However, it has been important for the JAC to provide a transparent and objective statement Problem in diversity : overwhelmingly males, white and socially elite Has been argued that having more female judges would make a difference, as people are more likely to to have confidence in a diverse judiciary (similar with democratic legitimacy) How is judicial diversity to be achieved ? April 2009 : LC established and Advisory Panel on Judicial Diversity, chaired by Baroness R.J Neuberger Charged with identifying the barrier to more diverse judiciary and making recommendations to achieve speedier and sustained progress Goal : making it more representative of the people it serves November 2011 : LC and Secretary of Staff for Justice, K. Clarke, launched a consultation paper that showed the government’s support (‘Appointments and Diversity : A Judiciary for the 21st Century’) March 2012 : The House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution produced a report in order to reiterate the need to implement the recommendations of the Advisory Panel (‘Judicial Appointments’) May 2012 : seeing the response to their consultation, published a report (same name) The gov has accepted for the need to change but obus can’t be done easily and fast Crime and Court Act 2013 : enabled s.159 of the Equality Act 2010 to be available in relation to judicial appointments, which says that if there are two candidates of equal merits, the JAC may choose the one who will contribute the most to judicial diversity.

Executive involvement in appointing Judges :

The appointment process must reflect the need for judicial independence from the executive However, doesn’t mean that it should have no role LC has an important role, however some want to remove it or make it only formal, same for the PM But could have potential costs in terms of Acountability Ie. Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancelor, The Governance of Britain: Judicial Appointments (October 2007)

Parliament’s role in appointing Judges : Important to show that appointing judges has no political influences So, plays no direct role, although MPs and peers may require the LC (through debate and questions) to account for judicial appointments Parliamentary select committees can also question the members of the JAC Minimal involvement Moreover, individual judges are not accountable to parliament like ministers are The only way for p to have a role would be to enable some MPs to sit as members of the selection panels but it was agreed that they could play no useful role...