*/
The moral courage to make unpopular decisions is a necessary attribute of a judge, according to Lord Clarke.
In a paper on judicial appointments, “Selecting Judges: Merit, Moral Courage, Judgment and Diversity”, Lord Clarke of Stone-Cum-Ebony, formerly the Master of the Rolls and now a Justice of the Supreme Court, said four “essential” principles underpin any judicial selection and appointment process—openness, merit, good character and diversity.
Moral courage is as important as honesty in defining good character. He said: “Individuals who are likely to be swayed by public opinion, who might not make the right, the just, decision because it is an unpopular decision or because it is adverse to their interests cannot properly be seen as having good character.”
On diversity, he said judges must be properly representative of the state and not drawn from a single group within society. Therefore, more solicitors and those who do not practise advocacy should be encouraged to apply. Merit is a “mutable” criterion, but requires legal ability and practical judgment. Managerial skills are also required, as judges must actively case manage claims, as well as manage themselves and court staff.
“A judge must not only be seen and understood to be competent and able to exercise the moral courage needed to adjudicate fairly and justly, which comes through the merit criterion, they must also be trusted as individuals who will do so. Good character is essential to building this trust and confidence. It is difficult to conceive of a judiciary that could be trusted by the public to deal with cases justly, to do justice, if its members were not of unimpeachable character.”
An appointments process that is committed to openness is necessary in an open, democratic society, he said, particularly since the Human Rights Act 1998 and the greater use of judicial review applications means judges are “increasingly adjudicating as to rights between individuals and the state”.
He said that it was “absolutely essential” that active steps were taken to encourage all those who are eligible for appointment to apply. “It is no longer sufficient to carry on as before. Barristers, solicitors, legal executives, academics must be encouraged to apply where they meet the statutory qualification.”
On diversity, he said judges must be properly representative of the state and not drawn from a single group within society. Therefore, more solicitors and those who do not practise advocacy should be encouraged to apply. Merit is a “mutable” criterion, but requires legal ability and practical judgment. Managerial skills are also required, as judges must actively case manage claims, as well as manage themselves and court staff.
“A judge must not only be seen and understood to be competent and able to exercise the moral courage needed to adjudicate fairly and justly, which comes through the merit criterion, they must also be trusted as individuals who will do so. Good character is essential to building this trust and confidence. It is difficult to conceive of a judiciary that could be trusted by the public to deal with cases justly, to do justice, if its members were not of unimpeachable character.”
An appointments process that is committed to openness is necessary in an open, democratic society, he said, particularly since the Human Rights Act 1998 and the greater use of judicial review applications means judges are “increasingly adjudicating as to rights between individuals and the state”.
He said that it was “absolutely essential” that active steps were taken to encourage all those who are eligible for appointment to apply. “It is no longer sufficient to carry on as before. Barristers, solicitors, legal executives, academics must be encouraged to apply where they meet the statutory qualification.”
The moral courage to make unpopular decisions is a necessary attribute of a judge, according to Lord Clarke.
In a paper on judicial appointments, “Selecting Judges: Merit, Moral Courage, Judgment and Diversity”, Lord Clarke of Stone-Cum-Ebony, formerly the Master of the Rolls and now a Justice of the Supreme Court, said four “essential” principles underpin any judicial selection and appointment process—openness, merit, good character and diversity.
Moral courage is as important as honesty in defining good character. He said: “Individuals who are likely to be swayed by public opinion, who might not make the right, the just, decision because it is an unpopular decision or because it is adverse to their interests cannot properly be seen as having good character.”
Far-ranging month for the Chair of the Bar
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the most recent data on alcohol misuse in the UK, and the implications for alcohol testing in family proceedings
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how tailored financial planning can help barristers take control of their finances and plan with confidence
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Is the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office process fit for purpose? Women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not making it through the system, says Tana Adkin KC
Review by Daniel Barnett
Chair of the Bar reports back
