Faith matters in judicial appointments

THE chair of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) started his submission with a blizzard of data. Lord Kakkar’s aim was to show how much better the body he leads is doing over a 15-year period.

“Since the JAC was established, 16 per cent of applicants and 11 per cent of recommendations have been from minority communities,” he told the committee.

“In the eight-year period prior to the establishment of the JAC, those figures were 3.5 and four per cent respectively.

“In 2020, minority candidates made up 12 per cent of all recommendations for legal roles, and 23 per cent of all recommendations for non-legal roles. If we look at the question of the courts to judiciary in its composition, for those from minority communities, 3.8 per cent in 2006, at eight per cent now in 2020.”

While the figures may well be accurate, they only paint a partial picture. It is worth pointing out that:

all minorities are lumped into the BAME category, so how different racial groups are truly faring is not known.

in 2011, 14 per cent of the UK was non-white, which means despite the figures being 10 years out of date, the judiciary remains woefully ethnically unrepresentative.

But the judges who spoke to Eastern Eye have made clear that “secret soundings” prevent an applicant from progressing to immediate appointment, rather than being short-listed.

An analysis of the 2020 data reveals two significant statistics the peer did not mention.

If you are a white candidate, you are almost 2.5 times more likely to be “recommended for immediate appointment” than if you are not white.

Eastern Eye cannot say with absolute certainty that if you are from of south Asian heritage, you are at a disadvantage.

But the JAC figures do break down the data into religion.

If we accept that most south Asians will be from the Buddhist, Hindu, Islam or Sikh faith, and most white candidates would describe themselves as being Christian, a comparison can be made of how faith affects recommended appointments.

It shows that if you are Christian, you are almost two times as likely to be shortlisted than if you are from a major south Asian religion.

Second, if you are a Christian, you are 2.3 times more likely to be “recommended for immediate appointment” than if you are a Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh.

The Diversity of the judiciary 2020 statistics report admits that “BAME individuals are over-represented in applications for judicial appointment, but less likely to be successful.

“Overall,... success rates for BAME candidates were an estimated 17 per cent lower than for white candidates (not statistically significant)”.

Non-white judges concur with one select committee member who described Lord Kakkar as “complacent”.

“Lord Kakkar knows that judges, especially BAME judges, are being vetoed before they even get to interview,” said one south Asian judge.

“This is unconstitutional as these judges never get the chance to ... address the lies made in the secret soundings.

“This is not the way to appoint a fair and meritorious judiciary. I am sickened.”