Features

Under the Circuit Diversity Mentor Scheme senior QCs are the first point of contact for barristers interested in applying for judicial appointments or Silk. Desmond Browne QC explains what is involved.  

The Circuit Diversity Mentor Scheme was launched last year by my predecessor, Tim Dutton QC. The aim was to encourage the widest and most diverse possible range of applicants for the judiciary and Silk and appointment to the Attorney General’s Civil Panels. It was strongly endorsed by the Judicial Appointments Commission (“JAC”) which has amongst its statutory objectives “the need to encourage diversity in the range of persons available for selection for appointment”. 

Debate on the future of the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA 1998”) illustrates a number of contemporary political themes.  

There is convergence – both Labour and the Conservatives invoke the spirit of the Glorious Revolution with arguments for a new Bill of Rights. There is divergence – in essence, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are for the HRA 1998 and the Conservatives against it – though all sides have their mavericks. There is an awful lot of confusion, if not wilful obfuscation. And, underneath the politics, there are, largely unacknowledged, constitutional principles that limit what can practically be done. 

David Wurtzel meets Sue Carr QC, Chairman of the Complaints Committee of the Bar Standards Board, and discovers how the new complaints procedure is working in practice 

Members of the Bar can enjoy many exclusive benefits provided by Member Services, an entirely self-funding department of the Bar Council which helps to offset the cost of representing the Bar through commercial activity. 

Member Services are committed to negotiating tailored goods and services for the Bar, often at preferential prices unavailable to the general public.   Our Service Partners offer high quality services at best-value prices through high standards of customer care. Service Partners are selected on the basis of excellent service, an understanding of the Bar’s needs and a commitment to providing tailored services, often with substantial exclusive discounts. Wherever you see this logo, you can be assured that the organisation has signed up to this commitment. http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/for-the-bar/explore-member-benefits/ 

In the wake of the recent Court of Appeal interlocutory judgment giving the green light for the first trial on indictment by a judge alone, David Wolchover and Anthony Heaton-Armstrong propose some convenient and inexpensive jury tampering countermeasures 

The Northern Ireland judge-only Diplock courts for the trial of cases involving a terrorist dimension linger on, though nowadays with a much reduced throughput. But while the risk of jury intimidation and religious bias may have waned in Ulster the perceived problem of jury tampering—or “nobbling”—had supposedly increased in England and Wales to such an extent that provision was finally enacted in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (“CJA 2003”), s 44 for trials on indictment to be conducted where appropriate without a jury. 

Vivian Robinson QC explains why, after a successful career at the criminal Bar working for both sides of the fence of the Serious Fraud Office, he has joined the organisation as the first General Counsel 

How has the advocacy strategy deployed by the CPS been working in practice in the Crown Court? David Wurtzel investigates.  

In 2004 the new Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Ken MacDonald, launched an advocacy strategy vision in which the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) was to become “an organisation that routinely conducts its own high quality advocacy in all courts, efficiently and effectively”. In that first year, Crown advocates conducted 7,433 sessions; in 2008−09 it was 56,519 sessions including 8,401 trials. The aim was to achieve 25 per cent of the cost of advocacy-in-house by 2011; it is now 21.3 per cent. 

Max Hardy reviews The Legal Mire, a fundraising event for the Kalisher Scholarship.  

Not withstanding the manifold challenges that face the criminal Bar enduring reassurance can be drawn from the ever growing numbers wishing to join its ranks. Those who embark on the daunting path that leads to the Bar do so because they acknowledge the value that barristers can and do add to society. The spiralling costs associated with making a bid for the Bar will be well known to younger practitioners but by way of example a place on the BVC at City Law School for 2008–2009 costs £13,250. 

The Treasury Solicitor’s Department dispels the myths surrounding appointment to the Attorney General’s Civil Panels.  

The Attorney General maintains (by means of an open advertisement and application process) four panels of junior counsel to undertake civil and EU work for all government departments. She has three London panels and a regional panel. 

Following the response to our recent survey we are now able to target our resources on meeting those needs which have been identified by the Bar itself, writes Paul Mosson.  

Back in January the Chairman of the Bar, Desmond Browne QC, authored an article in this magazine to raise awareness of a member research project being conducted by mruk research ltd on behalf of the Bar Council (“Meeting your Needs”, Counsel, January 2009, pp 10-11). Subsequently all members of the Bar were invited to complete an online questionnaire asking what products and services the Bar would like Member Services to secure on their behalf and how they wished to be contacted about them. I know I speak for all at the Bar Council when I thank the 4,333 members of the Bar who freely gave their time to help shape the Member Services of the future by completing this questionnaire. They represented 25 per cent of those surveyed by email and 7 per cent of those surveyed by post, a very high response rate for a survey of this kind.