I was interested to receive a message in my in box on LinkedIn today encouraging me to visit this website run by the Judicial Appointments Commission website to find out more about the changing face of the judiciary. This is a really innovative use of social media by the legal community and is a great way to encourage those who would otherwise not even consider applying to find out more. The email advert was targeted to those with relevant keywords in their LinkedIn profiles rather than those who have self selected to receive information. Well done JAC for finding creative ways to reach out and increase diversity in the judiciary.
Firstly can I say (with an air of a trashy late-night phone in radio show) that I’m a long time reader and first time poster on your blog. I visit on a regular basis and greatly enjoy the variety of posts that appear.
On a similar vein, I also enjoyed this post. I too commend the JAC for finding new and exciting ways to promote the judiciary. However, what concerns me is what I am confronted with when I clicked on the link.
I sincerely hope that this is not in any way a provocative comment, but my honest view is the judiciary should be highly discriminatory: it should discriminate against average applicants. It should discriminate against those that are in it for an easy ride. It should discriminate against those that, quite frankly, are not up to the job.
The basis for judicial appointment should be on one factor and one factor alone: merit. The best should get the gig. For the avoidance of doubt, I don’t just mean the academically brilliant, I mean those that have excelled in practice, be they drawn from the bar, a solicitor or legal executive.
The appointment should be on merit and merit alone, not on racial group, gender or any other physical characteristic or sexuality, regardless of what that may be. It seems to me that this is the sole basis for a truly fair selection process.
Again, many thanks for the blog and keep up the hard work.
(and congratulations on the recent arrival).
ooh, trashy – but I like it! Take your point about the selection on merit, but isn’t the point that this is about broadening the pool of applicants NOT about how the applicants are whittled down in the course of the selection process? There are loads of great candidates out there who could succeed on merit but who might not apply without a nudge, because of perceptions about what sort of demographics might be welcomed or successful.
I take that point as well and you make it very well.
I’m just struggling with this whole concept at the moment as year after year I see friends and colleagues who would be truly excellent on the bench being passed over for Recorder/DDJ (and even full time appointments) in favour of substandard candidates.
There is no doubt that the old ‘tap on the shoulder’ system had to go, but I fear it has now swung too far in the other direction.