Fourth supplementary memorandum submitted
by the Judicial Appointments Commission
I am pleased to send you a copy of the first
annual report of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) [not
printed].
The report is a detailed account of our work
in the first year following our launch on 3 April 2006. In the
normal way, the report is embargoed until formally laid before
Parliament at 1200 noon today. During the year, we have concentrated
on the design and implementation of a new selection process, including
developing a definition of merit, and undertaking extensive activity
to reach the widest range of eligible applicants.
I am particularly proud of the introduction
of an altogether new, open, fair and accountable selection process
within a year. I believe the results of this effort are beginning
to show. There are very early signs of increases in overall applications
received. Furthermore figures based on a very small number of
selection exercises show an increase in the proportion of women
and solicitors who are being recommended for appointment.
Progress on minorities is slow and we are making
concerted efforts to improve this. However, to succeed in our
objective of diversifying the judiciary it will require a legal
profession that is itself diverse. I know that both the representatives
of the Law Society and the Bar Council at your recent session
made a similar point and described the efforts they are making
to broaden access to people from all backgrounds.
Unsurprisingly, given the scale of our task,
it was a challenging year but we have met the challenges. The
transitional arrangements were complex, requiring staff to manage
several different types of selection exercises. It may help if
I explain these arrangements fully.
Selection exercises run since the JAC was established
fall into four categories. They are:
1. Retained by the Lord Chancellor and run
entirely under DCA processes.
2. Started by the then DCA and finished by
the JAC and run under DCA processes but with small changes to
comply with the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
3. Started by the JAC before October 2006
and run mostly under DCA processes but with more significant changes
required to comply with the Act.
4. Started by the JAC after October 2006
and run under our new processes.
I have included in the attached annex information
about recommendations made by the JAC arising from selection exercises
in the second, third and fourth categories completed last year.
Decisions on appointments relating to the first category of selection
exercises were made by the Lord Chancellor without recommendations
by Commissioners.
In addition, the annex provides information
about two further categories of recommendations made in the last
year. The fifth category is recommendations for appointment by
the JAC from reserve lists created from selection exercises completed
before 3 April 2006 by the then DCA. The sixth category is recommendations
for appointment made by a specially constituted committee of the
Commission, as set out in section 80 of the Constitutional Reform
Act. The committee is convened by the Commission on receipt of
a vacancy request from the Lord Chancellor to fill a Court of
Appeal vacancy.
A further relevant issue is that selection exercises
may be run to fill an immediate vacancy, under section 87 of the
Act, or to identify candidates for future vacancy requests under
section 94. The outcome of a selection exercise might therefore
be either a list of candidates from which recommendations may
be made when vacancies have been identified; or a recommendation
for immediate appointment to a particular vacancy. The High Court
selection exercise, for example, identified a list of candidates
from which future recommendations may be made. The Commission
may also run a selection exercise under both sections of the Act,
that is, to create a section 94 list and to recommend candidates
for immediate appointment.
Baroness Prashar
Chairman
4 July 2007
Annex
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS
MADE IN 2006-07
1. Selection Exercises in progress in April
2006 for which responsibility was retained by the Lord Chancellor
Decisions on appointments relating to these
selection exercises were made by the Lord Chancellor without recommendations
by Commissioners. These exercises were run entirely under DCA
processes.
The Lord Chancellor also continued to advise
the Queen on appointments to vacancies in the High Court by drawing
from results of the 2005 High Court competition.
2. Selection Exercises started by the then
DCA and completed by the JAC by 31 March 2007
The 2 selection exercises below were started
by the then DCA and run under DCA processes but with small changes
to comply with the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
50 recommendations for appointment were made
by the JAC in respect of the Mental Health Review Tribunal selection
exercise and were accepted by the Lord Chancellor. No recommendation
was made for the selection exercise for the Chief Social Security
and Child Support Commissioner.
— Mental Health Review Tribunal fee-paid
legal member (s87—53 vacancies).
— Chief Social Security and Child Support
Commissioner (s87—1 vacancy).
3. Selection Exercises started by the JAC
before October 2006 and completed by 31 March 2007
The 4 selection exercises below were started
by the JAC before October 2006 and run mostly under DCA processes
but with more significant changes required to comply with the
Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
7 recommendations for appointment were made
by the JAC in respect of these 4 selection exercises and were
accepted by the Lord Chancellor.
— Specialist Circuit Judge Mercantile,
Chancery, Technology and Construction (Manchester) (s87—1
vacancy) and Specialist Circuit Judge Chancery (Bristol and Birmingham)
(s87—2 vacancies).
— Agricultural Lands Tribunal fee paid
Area Chairman (North and Wales) (s87—2 vacancies).
— Trade Marks fee-paid Appointed Person
(s87—1 vacancy).
— Gambling Appeals Tribunal President
(s87—1 vacancy).
4. Selection Exercises started by the JAC
after October 2006 and completed by 31 March 2007
The selection exercise below was run under the
new JAC selection processes.
1 recommendation for appointment was made by
the JAC in respect of this selection exercise and was accepted
by the Lord Chancellor.
— Special Immigration Appeals Commission
Chairman (s87—1 vacancy).
5. Further appointments from DCA competitions
during 2006-07
30 recommendations for appointment were made
by the JAC to the Lord Chancellor in response to 18 vacancy requests
covering 32 vacancies for appointments from a variety of reserve
lists created from competitions completed before 3 April 2006
by the then DCA.
These recommendations were all accepted by
the Lord Chancellor.
6. Court of Appeal Appointments
The Lord Chancellor retained responsibility
for appointments above the High Court until October 2006.
After October 2006 recommendations for appointments
to the Court of Appeal were made by a specially constituted committee
of the Commission, as set out in section 80 of the Constitutional
Reform Act. The committee is convened by the Commission on receipt
of a vacancy request from the Lord Chancellor to fill a Court
of Appeal vacancy.
The committee—comprising the Lord Chief
Justice as chairman, the Master of the Rolls as the second judicial
member and Baroness Prashar and Professor Dame Hazel Genn as the
Commissioner members—met twice to select Lords Justices
of Appeal.
Two recommendations for appointment were made
by the committee and were accepted by the Lord Chancellor.
| 
