The Society of Asian Lawyers (SAL) has voiced concern over reports that candidates have been put forward for judicial appointment in competitions they had not entered.

SAL chairman Sailesh Mehta said he had been informed that a position was to be given to a candidate who had applied for a different post but was on a waiting list of suitably qualified and potentially selectable candidates.

He said: ‘In principle it’s wrong, and the mischief is that someone can leapfrog others and be appointed without being interviewed by the same panel as other candidates.’

A Section 94 list, permitted under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, is used in circumstances where it is difficult to predict the number of vacancies required in a particular competition.

A Judicial Appointments Commission spokeswoman said she was not aware of this incident, adding that the Ministry of Justice appoints from the JAC’s recommendations.

She said the JAC favoured abolishing Section 94 lists due to the uncertainty they created.