A support network for judges has called for independent oversight of the body that deals with behavioural complaints after measures to improve the disciplinary process were confirmed by the lord chancellor and lord chief justice.

An expedited procedure for ‘straightforward and uncontentious’ cases and more detailed disciplinary statements are part of planned improvements to the current disciplinary process, which was set up nearly a decade ago.

The lord chancellor and lord chief justice said the changes set out in their report will preserve what already works well but also enable complaints about misconduct by judicial office-holders to be dealt with in a more timely, proportionate and transparent way.

The Judicial Support Network, one of the 57 consultation respondents, told the Gazette that judicial reforms are always welcome but that structural inadequacies remain.

In its consultation response, the network suggested external board monitoring of the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO), which deals with misconduct complaints.

'As well as concerns over apparently serious matters not leading to sanctions or not impeding promotion, members were concerned about the impact on them in relation to minor matters not being disposed of robustly and swiftly dismissed. Some apparently trivial complaints were taking too long to resolve and judges may not be being kept up-to-date with their progress through the system,' the network's consultation response stated.

The network also called for JCIO officers to be fully accountable for their actions.

Following publication of the lord chancellor and lord chief justice’s consultation response, a spokesperson for the network told the Gazette: ‘We still have no behavioural code, nor any anti-bullying code which is necessary to underpin the system.

‘There is still no system of external independent review, essential in a closed and powerful profession where reputational management seems to be the primary focus of decision making, and our lives and futures can be adversely affected whatever the outcome of any complaint. There should be post complaint monitoring to ensure that we are treated fairly during and after any complaint.

‘Importantly, so long as there is no library of decisions available, similar cases can and are treated very differently. We have ample examples of this. This won’t change under the “reformed” system.’

The network also called for compulsory legal expenses insurance for judges who wish to raise or are subject to a grievance, to ensure they are properly advised and represented.

A spokesperson for the Judicial Office said the Guide to Judicial Conduct sets out the standards of conduct which the lord chief justice and senior tribunals president expect judges to follow. ‘Bullying would clearly amount to a breach of those standards. There are procedures for raising a complaint about a judge’s conduct, a grievance and whistleblowing complaints.

On the absence of an external independent review mechanism, the Judicial Office said the independent Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman considers complaints about how the disciplinary process has been applied. If the statutory process has been incorrectly followed, the ombudsman can overturn a decision and order a reinvestigation.

The spokesperson added that all complaints are dealt with on their merits in accordance with statutory procedures approved by parliament. ‘The changes mean that in future, the public and the judiciary will have access to significantly more information about disciplinary decisions and for significantly longer periods of time, up to indefinitely for cases of removal from office.’

 

This article is now closed for comment.