6.1 While Judicial Group's main function is to support the Lord Chancellor in making or recommending appointments and in the development and execution of judicial appointments policy, this chapter gives details of the other responsibilities of the Group.
6.2 During the year Judicial Group has carried forward and developed reforms and policies on the appointment procedures for judicial office holders, and for their terms and conditions of service, all within a framework which upholds judicial independence. In this work Jenny Williams, the Director General, has been assisted by the two Directors of Judicial Group, Liz Grimsey, who is responsible for the work of the Judicial Courts and Judicial Tribunals Divisions, and David Nooney. David Nooney has responsibilities which include strategic planning for the Group, the use of I.T. across the Group, and initiatives to ensure that the Group, as part of the Lord Chancellor's Department, follows the Modernising Government agenda set by the Government. Further details on the staffing and resources of Judicial Group are in Annex D.
Complaints handling
6.3 The principle of judicial independence, which is central to this country's constitutional arrangements, means that it is not open to the Lord Chancellor or his Department to consider complaints about judicial decisions. The Lord Chancellor has no power to consider, review or overturn the decisions of the courts or the reasoning of judges making those decisions. However, the Lord Chancellor does consider complaints about the personal conduct of members of the judiciary. He expects the highest standards of behaviour from all levels of the judiciary and where it appears that there is cause for concern that these standards have not been met he requires his officials to conduct an investigation. However, the Lord Chancellor will not generally pursue a complaint if it relates to a hearing or to alleged judicial misconduct that took place so long ago that it would be unreasonable to expect the judge concerned to comment, or where the tape recording or transcript of the case have been destroyed.
6.4 The Lord Chancellor's statutory powers are limited to the dismissal of judicial office holders below the level of the High Court Bench, generally on the grounds of misbehaviour and incapacity and these are accordingly exercisable only in extreme cases. There have been no instances in 2001/2002 where it has been necessary for the Lord Chancellor to exercise these powers when considering complaints. But, as head of the judiciary, the Lord Chancellor is able to guide, counsel, advise or rebuke with a view to ensuring that judges uphold the standards of conduct which the public and he expects of them.
6.5 The Lord Chancellor takes a close personal interest in the handling of complaints, particularly those alleging racial or sexual discrimination. He also sees all serious complaints, most notably those alleging racial or sexual discrimination; and those which have attracted, or appear likely to attract, publicity. In addition he sees all cases in which there is a record of similar complaints from several different sources about the conduct of a particular judge. He generally replies personally to complaints in these categories and always replies personally to those received from Peers and Members of Parliament or the Assembly or Parliament Members in the devolved administrations.
6.6 Officials in the Judicial Correspondence Unit acting on behalf of the Lord Chancellor will generally draw the complaint to the attention of the member of the judiciary concerned and give him or her an opportunity to comment. However, the Lord Chancellor does not simply relay the judge's response back to the complainant. Instead he is committed to giving proper consideration to the judge's recollection of events and to the complainant's perception of what happened before coming to a conclusion based on the weight of evidence before him. Where necessary, therefore, officials will call for transcripts or other additional information and present this for consideration. The complainant receives a full reply and a copy is sent to the judge.
6.7 The Judicial Correspondence Unit was set up by the Lord Chancellor in 1998 with specific responsibility for complaints handling. The Unit aims to deliver a high quality service and was enlarged in May 2000 to meet the demand for an increasingly rigorous style of investigation.
6.8 Between 1 April 2001 and 31 March 2002 the Lord Chancellor received a total of 2,100 complaints about members of the judiciary, the majority of which related to judicial decisions and were therefore not considered. Of the remainder 347 were taken forward for investigation as they related to personal conduct. There were 85 cases outstanding at the end of the year. Out of the 262 completed cases there were three in which the Lord Chancellor saw fit to take further action. This either took the form of a letter from the Lord Chancellor or, at his instigation, of a meeting between the judge and the relevant Presiding Judge.
Judicial Salaries
6.9 Revised judicial salary levels were introduced with effect from 1 April 2002, following the recommendations of the Senior Salaries Review Body (an independent body which makes recommendations to the Government about salaries of a number of groups including the judiciary) in its latest Report published in February. The recommendation was for a 5.4% increase to re-establish an appropriate relationship between the remit groups and a further 2.5% annual increase. These increases have been staged with 3.6% being paid from 1 April 2002 and the balance being paid from 1 April 2003. The salaries for some of the main judicial offices are:
1 April 2002 1 April 2003
|
Lord Chief Justice |
£177,545 |
£185,145 |
|
Master of the Rolls |
£169,089 |
£176,327 |
|
Lords of Appeal in Ordinary |
£163,376 |
£170,370 |
|
Vice-Chancellor |
||
|
President of the Family Division |
||
|
Lords Justices of Appeal |
£155,293 |
£161,941 |
|
High Court Judges |
£137,377 |
£143,258 |
|
Senior Circuit Judges |
£111,210 |
£115,971 |
|
Specialist Circuit Judges |
||
|
Circuit Judges |
£102,999 |
£107,408 |
|
Senior District Judge of the Family Division |
||
|
Area/Regional Immigration |
£99,110 |
£103,353 |
|
Adjudicators |
||
|
Members, Lands Tribunals |
||
|
District Judges |
£82,639 |
£86,176 |
|
District Judges (Magistrates' Courts) |
Judicial Pensions
6.10 On appointment, all salaried holders of judicial office automatically become members of the judicial pension scheme. However, membership is not compulsory and a judicial office holder may opt out of the scheme.
6.11 Judicial office holders appointed before 31 March 1995 became members of one of the schemes established under the Judicial Pensions Act 1981. All members of the judiciary initially appointed to judicial office on or after 31 March 1995 are members of the scheme established under the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993.
6.12 Staff within Judicial Group deal with any enquiries from those members of the judiciary who sit in courts and tribunals administered by the Lord Chancellor's Department, about the administration of the judicial pension schemes, or their own personal position. When pension benefits become payable, on the retirement or death of a judicial office holder, the pension award is calculated and the necessary arrangements are made for payment.
Retirements
6.13 62 judicial office-holders within the administrative ambit of the Lord Chancellor's Department ceased to hold office during the period 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002. Of that number, one was the result of the death in service of a High Court Judge, two were the result of the death in service of Circuit Judges, two involved the death in service of District Judges and one the death in service of a Queen's Bench Master. There were also four medical retirements, three High Court Judges and one Immigration Adjudicator. The remaining 52 retirements were either at the request of the judicial office-holder concerned or because he or she had reached his or her compulsory retirement date. These retirements were:
Terms and Conditions
6.14 It has been the Department's aim to harmonise, wherever possible and appropriate, the conditions of appointment and terms of service for all levels of the judiciary. On appointment judicial office holders are given details of conditions and terms, but the format and wording of these varies from one office to another. Newly appointed High Court Judges, Circuit Judges, District Judges, District Judges (Magistrates' Courts), Masters and Registrars of the Supreme Court, Assistant Judge Advocates General, and full-time members of the judiciary in tribunals administered by the Lord Chancellor's Department are issued with Memoranda that are a comprehensive compendium of the conditions of appointment and terms of service. In line with the Department's aim, the current editions (October 2000) of the Memoranda align judicial terms and conditions wherever possible and appropriate.
Records Management
6.15 The Judicial Records Management Unit of the Judicial Appointments Policy and Secretariat Division supports the other Divisions in the running of competitions by managing both manual files and electronic records. Manual files are used predominantly as a repository for all the information collated in connection with an individual's application, whereas the electronic database is used to track the progress of an application through the various stages. At the end of March 2002, there were approximately 21,020 paper files and 23,000 electronic records.
6.16 In addition to the day-to-day creation and provision of such records, the Unit is also responsible for the policy issues surrounding the preservation of the records, in line with guidelines issued by the Public Record Office.
Information and communication via the Internet
6.17 The "Judges and Queen's Counsel"section of the Lord Chancellor's Department website (www.lcd.gov.uk) contains comprehensive information about appointments procedures, details of current competitions, the latest statistics on the numbers of judges including breakdowns by gender and ethnic origin, judicial salary scales and pensions information. The "What's New?"section is a useful reference for anyone who wishes to consult the latest research, Consultation and White Papers which concern the Department, plus speeches given by the ministers and Senior Judges. In addition the full text of this and the other three Annual Reports is available as well as Sir Leonard Peach's report. The "Magistrates"section also contains detailed information about the work of magistrates and the appointments procedure, together with recent reports such as the Evaluation Report on Cracked, Ineffective and Vacated Trials. Work continues on plans to provide guidance on the website about making complaints about the conduct of judges, and also the conduct of lay magistrates. More information about both these projects will be included in next year's report.
6.18 During 2001/2002, more use was made of the website for providing information and application forms for competitions. Within many competitions an electronic application form and guide can be downloaded from LCD's website, and the completed application can be e-mailed to the relevant part of Judicial Group.
6.19 The Department's review of application forms and guidance notes has resulted in the production of a proposed generic form and guide. The first of these has recently been piloted and evaluation is underway. For example, 138 (24%) of the applications for the Recorder competition were received via e-mail.
6.20 Each member of Judicial Group has access to external e-mail facilities and each section in the Group has a dedicated e-mail address to which enquiries and requests for information can be made. These addresses, together with telephone numbers and other contact details, are given in Annex I.
Lay interviewers
6.21 Lay interviewers have been members of the judicial appointment sifting and interview panels for some years. They are appointed from the Lord Chancellor's Advisory Committees on the Appointment of Lay Magistrates. They bring the perspective of the lay court user and the wider public to the appointment process and play a full and active part in shortlisting and interviewing.
6.22 During the course of 2001/2002, the terms of appointment of seven lay interviewers expired; five appointments were renewed and two were not. There were no new appointments as none have been required and it has therefore not been necessary to develop any new selection arrangements, as mentioned in last year's report.
TABLE SHOWING GENDER AND ETHNICITY OF LAY INTERVIEWERS
| Total | Female | White | Black | Asian | Not Known | |
| 42 | 16 | 26 | 37 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
Work shadowing scheme
6.23 The work shadowing scheme has been running successfully since March 1999. The scheme gives lawyers the opportunity to shadow a Circuit Judge or District Judge (Civil) for up to five days to find out what it would be like to sit judicially before deciding whether or not to apply for a judicial appointment. The scheme is administered jointly by Judicial Group and the Court Service. Applications are received by Judicial Group (contact details are in Annex I) who arrange for each applicant to be security cleared. They are then passed to the nearest Group Manager's Office to the area requested by the applicant. The Group Manager's Office then liaises directly with the applicant to allocate him or her to one of the authorised shadow judges. The aim is for each shadower to observe as many as possible of a judge's main duties, including, as appropriate, preparing for trial, case management, presiding over court proceedings, hearing actions, sentencing, determining applications and giving judgments.
6.24 Within Judicial Group the administration of the work shadowing scheme is separate from the sections dealing with Recorder and Deputy District Judge (Civil) appointments. The work shadowing section do not tell their colleagues in the appointments sections who has or has not shadowed a judge. This is a deliberate policy to avoid the scheme being seen as something an applicant should be seen to have done. The scheme is intended to give an insight into the workings of the courts and the tasks of judges to those who are not so familiar with them, for example, to civil practitioners or those with less advocacy experience who want, or who think they might want, to apply to be a Recorder in the Crown Court. A practitioner who appears most of the time in the criminal courts and also wants to apply as a Recorder in the Crown Court may not therefore gain much further insight.
6.25 The scheme is publicised at events and on the LCD website as well as in robing rooms and other appropriate places within court buildings throughout the country.
6.26 The following chart shows the number of work shadowing applicants during 2001/2002 and applications dealt with in previous years.
| TotalNo. | Gender | Profession | Ethnic Origin | Judge shadowed | Frequency of shadowing days | ||||||||||
| Period Covered | of Applicants | Male | Female | Barrister | Solicitor | White | Other | Circuit Judge | District Judge | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| To 7 April 2000 | 53 | 33 | 20 | 30 | 23 | 48 | 5 | 40 | 13 | 0 | 4 | 13 | 2 | 34 | |
| To 5 April 2001 | 85 | 56 | 29 | 31 | 54 | 79 | 6 | 26 | 59 | 3 | 12 | 15 | 2 | 53 | |
| To 5 April 2002 | 78 | 43 | 35 | 34 | 44 | 73 | 5 | 43 | 35 | 4 | 12 | 13 | 8 | 41 | |
| Cumulative totals | 216 | 132 | 84 | 95 | 121 | 200 | 16 | 109 | 107 | 7 | 28 | 41 | 12 | 128 | |
6.27 The majority of those participating in the scheme, both during 2001/2002 and cumulatively since the beginning of the scheme, have been solicitors. The proportion of women participating in 2001/2002 was 44.8%, an increase on previous years and the proportion of minority ethnic lawyers was 6.4%, down slightly on previous years.
The Judges and Schools Booklet
6.28 A senior member of Judicial Group acted as project manager for the project to produce the Judges and Schools booklet. This project was led by the judiciary and drafted and produced by Judge Geoffrey Rivlin QC and the Citizenship Foundation. It is designed to support Key Stage 3 and 4 of the National Curriculum on Citizenship by encouraging schools to visit courts and meet judges. The project manager oversaw the design, production and distribution of the booklet, which was launched by Rosie Winterton MP in February 2002. Work has started within Judicial Group on a similar project for Magistrates and Schools.