Andrew Drozdowski AS Law 11 November 2002 Thanet College Broadstairs

Activity Questions

Why might some lawyers refuse to be appointed as a judge?

When considering a move into the judiciary one consideration has to be whether or not the rewards are great enough. This is because it is clear when making a comparison of the earnings of a barrister and the earnings of a judge. (QC average £268,688 per year and highest paid £705,000) In many cases a judge earns less than Queen’s Counsel and so the post of Judge may well be refused.

Why could some feel at a disadvantage when the appointment of new judges is being considered?

When taking into consideration the choosing and appointment of a new judge, soundings are made as to the character of the individual. These soundings are often verbal and are not recorded. In the case where the Lord Chancellor has personal knowledge of an individual as a friend this places him/her in a far better position for appointment. This disadvantages the wider pool of those who are not personally acquainted with the Lord Chancellor.

Give one good point about recent judicial appointments.

The promotion of Dame Butler-Sloss to President of the Family Division is a step forward for women in within the judiciary who is the first woman to reach such a rank.

Give one bad point about recent judicial appointments.

It would seem logical that when a Labour appointed head of the judiciary took over from a Conservative appointed one there would be a marked difference in the type of appointments made to chief positions within the judiciary. This has not been the case and it is still the case that few are chosen from the minority groups. 124 out of 125 chosen were white, 105 were not taken from the ranks of the solicitors and 105 were men. So, it is clear that there is no social change within the judiciary even when there is a political change in making. It might be said that the New Labour government has gone out of its way to ensure that a Blairite Lord Chancellor is not seen to be appointing a clearly socialist group of judges and this has led to no departure from the previous administration. You might expect political appointments to be made and this is not proven to have happened. This might seem positive and yet with social change and all the criticisms (mainly inequality) whilst New Labour were not in power, it might be thought that New Labour would address this within every sphere of society they could including the judiciary. Yet the situation is plain in that the current judiciary is overwhelmingly white, male, from a narrow social background and fails to mirror that of society at large.