House of Commons - Justice Committee

The work of the Judicial Appointments Commission - Justice Committee Contents

Memorandum from the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC)

Thank you for inviting us to appear before the Justice Select Committee on 7 September, and providing us with an opportunity to explain the work of the JAC over the last four and a half years.

It might be helpful if I were to provide you and the Committee with some key facts and figures. These show that the JAC has made a difference and is an effective and efficient organisation. We have succeeded in establishing a strong organisation and, through our fair and open selection processes won the confidence of potential applicants whatever their background. We have also begun to make a difference to diversity.

The end to end selection and appointments process does take a long time but it is not often appreciated that we are the middle part of this process. Our part in the selection process, on average, takes 19 weeks for very large competitions and even less for smaller selection exercises. It might, therefore, be helpful if your Committee were to take evidence from the Courts/ Tribunals Service and the Ministry of Justice about their part in this process.

As you are aware I am leaving the JAC at the end of this month when my five year terms expires. I am very proud of what we have achieved, but that is not to say that there is no room for improvement. Setting up the JAC has been like building a house and like any new build, there are bound to be snags which can be corrected. I do not, however, believe there is a need either to radically restructure the JAC or demolish it.

I very much hope that your Committee will have an opportunity to scrutinise the results of the review of judicial appointments before any final decisions are taken.

KEY JAC FACTS

Average costs for JAC staff (excluding panellists, Commissioners and the Chairman)

Pay costs in the annual accounts include employer's National Insurance and pension contributions and panellist fees. Average staff salary can be calculated as below for 2009-10.

— Basic pay cost (excludes Employers National Insurance contributions and Superannuation)—£3,783,630.

— Average number of staff—105.

— Average pay (excluding pension and NIC)—£36,035 per member of staff.

Based on a benchmarking analysis carried out recently it was found that the average cost per member of staff within the JAC is about average when compared against other arms length bodies.

Budget

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Grant in aid funding £8.15m £7.61m £6.86m

Figures for exercises closed

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Selection exercises 27 25 24

Applications handled 2,484 3,509 3,084

Recommendations 458 449 446

Examples of large exercises

— Deputy District Judge (Civil), 1,556 applications for 193 posts (8:1 ratio).

— Fee Paid Employment Judge, 766 applications for 35 posts (21:1 ratio).

Staffing

31/03/08 31/03/09 31/03/10 31/08/10

Staff (inc agency staff) 111 108 107 99

% on loan or secondment 91% 44% 25% 18%

Note: Staff numbers do not include commissioners or panel members

Average exercise length

— Average length of exercise in 2009/10—19 weeks.

— Average length of exercise under the DCA—23 weeks.

Complaints

— Since 2006 (to July 2010), 123 complaints relating to JAC processes received—a little over 1% of all applications.

— 53 complaints received by JAC in 2009-10.

— 0.4% of candidates have referred their complaint to the Ombudsman. Three complaints have been partially upheld by Ombudsman to date, a rate of less than one per year.

Diversity

The JAC has published jointly with the MoJ an analysis of the diversity of appointments since 1998, which found that under the JAC:

— more women and BME candidates are applying;

— more women are being recommended; and

— the number of BME candidates being recommended has held steady.

In the last five years the number of women High Court judges has increased by 50%.

We will shortly be publishing a joint analysis on solicitor appointments over the last 10 years. This is currently with the Ministry of Justice to agree but we have attached the current draft here. Initial analysis suggests that:

— under the JAC solicitors have performed better in selection exercises for entry-level posts, such as Recorder, and middle ranking posts, such as Circuit Judge, than before the JAC was created; and

— even in senior appointments, such as High Court Judge, more solicitors have been selected than in the period immediately before the JAC was created.

JAC SELECTION PROCESS

Stage 1: Application

Advertising and outreach—Most positions are advertised widely in the national press, legal publications, the professional press and online. The JAC runs roadshows and other outreach events designed to explain the selection system to potential applicants and to encourage them to consider a judicial career. We also work with a range of key interested parties to disseminate information about specific appointments and about the judicial appointments process in general.

Application form and information pack—The application form is tailored for each individual selection exercise. Alongside the form, an information pack is available to applicants, which includes details of the eligibility criteria and guidance on the application process. This too is tailored for each exercise. Both documents can be downloaded from our website or are sent out to candidates on request.

Eligibility checks—Once JAC has received a completed application form, we check each candidate's eligibility for the post.

Stage 2: Assessment

References—Candidates are asked on their application form to nominate up to three referees normally, or in some cases six. The Commission may also seek references from a list of Commission-nominated referees, which is published for each selection exercise. The time at which references are sought will depend on the assessment method used for shortlisting:

If a qualifying test

If a paper sift

In all cases, references will form part of the information that JAC uses to make final selection recommendations to the Lord Chancellor.

Shortlisting—Shortlisting may be done on the basis of qualifying tests or paper sift, using the application form and references. For senior appointments, where candidates will usually have an extensive track record, shortlisting will normally be done on information supplied by the candidate and from references.

Interviews and selection days—The next stage of the assessment will vary depending on the nature of the post to be filled. Candidates might be asked to attend a selection day, which may entail a combination of role-plays and an interview. For some specialist and the most senior appointments, there might be only a panel interview.

Panel reports—Panel members assess all the information about each candidate, prepare reports on their findings and agree which candidates best meet the required abilities.

Statutory Consultation—As required under section 88(3) and 94(3) of the CRA, the panels' reports on candidates likely to be considered by the Commission are sent to the Lord Chief Justice and another person who has held the post, or has relevant experience.

Stage 3: Selection and Recommendation

Recommendation to the Lord Chancellor—The Commissioners consider all the information gathered on the candidates and select candidates to be recommended to the Lord Chancellor for appointment.

Final checks—For existing judicial office holders, we check with the Office for Judicial Complaints (OJC) that there are no complaints outstanding against them. For all other candidates recommended for appointment, a series of good character checks are done with the Police, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs and relevant professional bodies.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS RELATION TO JAC SELECTIONS

For LCJ and Heads of Division appointments:

— s69—LC consults LCJ and provides JAC with a vacancy request.

— s70—the Commission must appoint a selection panel which will determine the selection process and make a selection.

— s71—The selection panel must consist of four members: the most senior E&W Supreme Court judge:

— the LCJ;

— the chairman of the Commission;

— a lay member of the Commission designated by the Chairman;

— s72—the selection panel must submit a report to the LC with a recommendation.

— s73—The LC can: accept, reject or ask for reconsideration.

Selection of Lords Justices of Appeal

— s78—LC consults LCJ and provides JAC with a vacancy request.