‘Yes, I could have been a judge but I never had the Latin, never had the Latin for the judging. I just never had sufficient of it to get through the rigorous judging exams.’

The judicial appointments process has, thankfully, moved on since Peter Cook’s monologue in Beyond the Fringe back in 1961. The traditional method of backstairs soundings by the Lord Chancellor’s Department and the gentle tap on the shoulder of those considered appropriate for the bench is no more. The modern process is more transparent and inherently inclusive, but the process is only half the picture. To paint the other half, the system requires more diverse applicants in greater numbers. It also needs more solicitors.

The establishment of the Judicial Appointments Commission in 2006 marked a major step towards the creation of a diverse, representative judiciary. True, the judiciary has not been transformed overnight, but the selection structures to encourage greater diversity are largely in place. Recent statistics published by the JAC for recorders show that the numbers of successful women and black and ethnic minority candidates selected was in proportion to the pool of candidates eligible to apply. It will take many years for those newly appointed to work through to the higher levels of the judiciary, but the seeds have at least been planted.

There remains one major under-represented group – solicitors.

Ostensibly, solicitors have never been in a better position to apply to enter the judiciary. The JAC is looking for evidence of five qualities – intellectual capacity, personal qualities, an ability to understand and deal fairly, authority and communications skills, and efficiency. The process is not founded on identifying highly skilled advocates, and the required qualities are as readily evident in solicitors as barristers.

The main barrier facing solicitors interested in applying is one of perception rather than process. Many believe that the system is so stacked against them that there is little point in applying. But statistics tell us otherwise. The proportion of solicitors that are shortlisted and selected is roughly commensurate to the proportion which applies. However, while solicitors apparently stand as much chance of success as any other group, the number of applications received from solicitors is very small when compared to the entire ‘eligible pool’ of solicitor applicants.

That said, the system is not perfect. The length of the appointment process presents specific problems for solicitors (often partners), who will be discouraged from indicating they have an interest in judicial appointment because of the uncertainty this creates over their future within the partnership.

The requirement for references from a managing partner or mentor within a firm may cause problems for sole practitioners or solicitors who may be reluctant to broadcast their intentions. Furthermore, references should be considered at the conclusion of the selection process rather than the outset, thus ensuring that appointments are transparently based on the candidate’s performance in the various stages of the selection process and not according to the seniority of the referees they have been able to secure.

Also, while the role-play exercise is intended to test an applicant’s qualities and attributes, the design of the exercise potentially gives an advantage to practitioners more familiar with a courtroom or tribunal setting. It should be possible to test only the attributes and qualities that are being sought using competency-based assessment – there are many similarities between a solicitor handling a case file, dealing with the client and other parties and coming to a satisfactory resolution, and a judge handling a case in a court.

The JAC needs to overcome these problems, although there is much that the profession could do to mitigate their effects. Recognising the need to encourage firms to look more favourably on solicitors seeking permission to apply for judicial appointments is a good start. The message needs to get through that judicial experience can only enhance the standard of client care offered by a practitioner, and that this benefits a firm as a whole.

The Law Society is committed to working with the JAC in disseminating information about judicial appointments to the profession and assisting with outreach events. The Society’s website carries up-to-date information about current selection exercises, which are also publicised through its electronic newsletter, Professional Update. JAC advertisements are also carried by the Gazette.

Those interested in applying should consider applying to shadow a judge in the first instance (www.judiciary.gov.uk/workshadowing). A range of selection exercises currently being run is available on the JAC website. There are many appointments available on the various tribunals which would provide an excellent starting point for a judicial career.

I hope that more members of the profession will be applying for judicial appointments and that they will meet with increasing success.

No Latin required, I promise.

Paul Marsh is president of the Law Society