Judges are professional people who are paid for their services that depend on the case in hand and their position in the judicial hierarchy. The hierarchy of judges ranges from being the chair of a tribunal to the Lord Chancellor or the Lord Chief Justice.
To become a judge a candidate must have been a solicitor or barrister for at least seven years – a period of three years as a recorder (trainee judge) follows.
This ensures that all candidates for the Judiciary are experienced advocates, and in addition there is now training for judges through the judicial studies board. The Judiciary also varies according to its task, and judges are appointed to these tasks according to their experience, for example: the High Court is divided into three divisions
- The Queens Bench – headed by the Lord Chief Justice, although cases are dealt with by “puisne” judges or High Court Judges.
- The Chancery Division – headed by the Vice Chancellor and a dozen or so High Court Judges.
- The Family Division – headed by the President and assisted by High Court Judges
There is also the appeals court, which consists entirely of professional judges who have been promoted from the High Court. The Court of appeal is headed by the Master of the Rolls on the civil side and the Lord Chief Justice on the criminal side. Three judges usually hear appeals.
The Lord Chancellor heads the House of Lords (as head of the Judiciary) and is involved in the appointment of all other judges.
It can be argued that currently the technical quality of the professional judiciary is higher than at any previous time (with exceptions!) however, certain stereotypical images of Judges remain. Judges are seen as old, conservative, well (privately) educated white men – with little grasp of the reality of every day life for the man (or woman) on the Clapham Omnibus. The media regularly enjoy the ritual pillorying of a High Court Judge who requires an explanation of the identity of the latest boy band.
Additionally the appointment of senior judges is criticised as “jobs for the boys” – this in turn has lead to the interpretation of the judiciary as an unfair representation of society; a dangerous allegation for a body who create and interpret the law.
Since the Courts and Legal Services act (1990) the majority of these criticisms have been addressed and are now without foundation.
One of the key strengths of Judges is their independence form the political system and financial independence. There are several other areas of value to the current system. Judges have scrutiny of tenure (they are permanent in their appointment) This ensures that they cannot be changed at the whim of a new Government, or indeed dismissed for offending a current Government. Judges can only be removed from position by the Monarch following a vote in both houses of Parliament. Only one Judge has been removed in this way since 1701 (Sir Jonah Barrington – he lost his position in 1830 for theft of Court funds)
Currently Judges salaries are set at a high rate in order to avoid financial impropriety and to reflect the responsibility of their positions. In addition their salaries are paid from a consolidated fund in order to ensure that again there can be no political interference with the appropriation of money.
There are other regulations and conventions that further separate the Judiciary from politics. Parliamentary convention prevents the discussion of judges’ decisions, or of matters awaiting judgement. Conversely Judges are prohibited from joining political parties or taking part in partisan political activity – they are however permitted to vote.
Additionally Judges are discouraged from commenting on matters of party political debate. Lord Chancellor Kilmuir stated in 1955 “it is undesirable for members of the judiciary to broadcast on the wireless or to appear on television…..(because)…..every utterance which he makes in public, except in the course of his actual duty, must necessarily bring him within the focus of criticism”
Whilst previous criticisms of the judiciary and it’s selection may have had foundation recent changes (following the Courts and Legal Services Act (1990) have ensured that there is now little room for criticism. Judges by their selection and nature are ensured to be professional competent legal advisors as befits their role. Their promotion is based on competence and experience and their independence is ensured by a series of procedures and customs; which may give rise to allegations of remoteness from the ordinary people. However, Judges must be remote and awesome to the ordinary man in order to retain the validity of the court as a dispenser of justice.
