The lord chancellor has accused shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy of undermining public confidence in the judiciary after Timothy publicly demanded an investigation into the deputy chief magistrate. It is his first public intervention on the issue since taking his oath of office at the beginning of this month.
Alex Norris decided to publish his response to Timothy’s letter on the Ministry of Justice website yesterday after Timothy posted his letter to Norris on social media platform X.
Timothy had demanded an investigation into deputy chief magistrate Tan Ikram, telling the lord chancellor he found Ikram’s record and actions ‘deeply concerning’. Actions that concerned Timothy included Ikram ‘liking’ a LinkedIn post that referred to an ‘Israeli terrorist’.
Norris pointed out that the LinkedIn incident was dealt with by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
Norris acknowledged that people would not always agree with judicial decisions ‘but personalised criticism of individual judges, particularly where it relies on selective reporting or omits relevant context, as you have done, risks undermining public confidence in the ability of judges to decide cases independently and impartially’.
The lord chancellor added: ‘At a time when judicial office holders, along with others in public life, are facing increasing security concerns, all those participating in public debate should be mindful of the wider environment in which that debate takes place. Judges, unlike politicians, are constrained in their ability to respond publicly to personal criticism. Those of us in prominent positions therefore have a particular responsibility to ensure that legitimate scrutiny does not become personal attack.
‘Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the rule of law. Whatever our political differences, we have a shared responsibility to defend it, and to ensure that our public debate respects the independence of judges and their ability to decide the cases before them without fear or favour. I would ask that you refrain from mounting this kind of dangerous public criticism in future.’
