The government wants to retain the controversial power to reject names put forward by its new judicial appointments commission (JAC), despite a majority of respondents to its consultation calling for no executive role in the process, it emerged this week.

Unveiling a deal to safeguard judicial independence - which will include for the first time a statutory guarantee - the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, Lord Falconer, said the forthcoming Constitutional Reform Bill would give ministers limited powers to challenge a JAC recommendation.

The deal was reached by Lord Falconer with the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf, who last year claimed that the original proposals constituted a major threat to the independence of the judiciary.

However, a majority of the 270 respondents to the government consultation on the JAC - released this week - backed it being an appointing commission with no political interference.

The City of London Law Society, Liberty and Lords Justice Buxton and Schiemann were among them.

Some 24% favoured a recommending commission, while only 13% - including the Law Society - supported a hybrid that makes junior appointments.

Under the proposals, the JAC would recommend one person for an appointment, and provide details of the other people considered.

The secretary of state would be able to reject or ask the JAC to reconsider, giving reasons why.

For appointments to the Court of Appeal, he would only be able to reject one candidate and ask the JAC to reconsider once.

Lord Falconer said the Lord Chief Justice would replace him as leader of the judges in England and Wales, with the new title President of the Courts of England and Wales.

The secretary of state would be accountable for the courts to Parliament, and have a separate, specific duty to defend and uphold the independence of the judiciary.

Also, the secretary of state and president must agree before a judge is disciplined, while the Judicial Studies Board would remain independent.

Judges would also have more influence on resource issues.

Lord Woolf, speaking with the support of the Judges Council and the senior judiciary, said: 'Once there is no longer a Lord Chancellor who is head of the judiciary, it is vitally important to the administration of justice that there are provisions in the legislation which protect the judiciary...

This, in the judgement of the judiciary, is what the proposals achieve.'

The JAC would be made up of six lay members - one of whom would chair it - five judges, a barrister, a solicitor, a lay magistrate and a tribunal member (legal or lay).

Law Society President Peter Williamson said the Society welcomed the agreement.

However, he expressed concern that a politician would be involved in disciplining judges.

By Rachel Rothwell and Neil Rose

See [2004] Gazette, 29 January, page 14