Judges should think carefully about the risk of perceived bias before accepting an invitation to speak at a set of chambers or law firm, according to updated guidance on judicial conduct published this week.

On public debate and the media, the guidance says judicial office holders should be aware that participation in any public debate can risk undermining public perception in the impartiality of the judiciary as they do not have control over the terms of the debate or how their comments will be interpreted. They should also be aware of the possibility that the issue being discussed could be subject of a future case before them.

As a result, office holders should be ‘circumspect’ before accepting any invitation or engaging in public debate, and ideally check with their leadership judge.

‘Any judicial office holder who decides to participate in public debate should be careful to ensure that the occasion does not create a public perception of partiality towards a particular organisation (including a set of chambers or firm of solicitors), group or cause or to a lack of even handedness. Care should also be taken, therefore, about the place at which and the occasion on which a judicial office holder speaks,’ the guidance says.

Judges can speak on uncontroversial legal matters at lectures, conferences or seminars organised by professional bodies, academic or non-profit organisations. However, lectures and seminars dealing with matters of more general public interest could raise wider policy issues that are not immediately apparent. ‘Depending on the circumstances, it may be inappropriate for a judicial office holder to deliver a public lecture or participate in a conference or seminar run by a commercial organisation,’ the guidance says.

Office holders wishing to use social media should decide whether to use their own name or a pseudonym. A pseudonym may be justifiable for security purposes ‘but should not be used to disguise the source of content that would risk discrediting the judge or the judiciary if its source were known’, the document says - adding that failure to adhere to the guidance could lead to disciplinary action.

The revised guidance also contains the ‘statement of expected behaviour’ published by the senior judiciary after research commissioned by the lord chief justice found examples of alleged bullying, harassment and discriminaton.

 

This article is now closed for comment.