The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) has completely failed solicitors. These failures include having to re-sift applications for the last circuit judge (CJ) competition; unjustifiably restricting a wide category of potential applicants, mainly from the solicitors' side of the profession, to senior CJ competitions; and failing to appoint to the High Court bench any solicitor, whether directly or from the circuit bench.


The President is right (see [Gazette] 2008, 24 January, 1). A disproportionate amount of weight is given to the views of the senior judiciary. The re-sifting of applications for the CJ competition was allegedly undertaken on the basis that the JAC had not taken up references when it should have. However, it is more likely to have been undertaken because the senior judiciary were unhappy about some of the candidates who were sifted out.



I should add that the views of the senior judiciary do not only come from references or secret soundings. The presence in the sift panel and the interview panel of a senior member of the judiciary in applications for senior positions is likely in the substantial majority of cases to exclude a solicitor who might have been fortunate enough to make it through the sift stage.



However, this is not all. There are a number of other failings. Feedback letters to unsuccessful candidates are often inadequate. No proper career path exists for a person who is successful in obtaining a part-time appointment or for a person who is already in office. And anecdotal evidence suggests that huge administrative difficulties exist within the JAC.



Yet, the JAC appears entirely unperturbed by its serial failings. Its alleged or purported commitment to the promotion of diversity and appointment on merit is a central feature in all the talks that I have attended. It is also the central theme in all the articles that I have seen written by its chairman and other officials. However, it has shown itself unable to apply those principles in practice. It is not fit for purpose and needs to be scrapped.



I do not have the confidence in the JAC to justify applying for appointment yet again. I am not therefore going to do so. However, I wish any of my colleagues who want to apply every success. Contrary to what the JAC says, they will do well to realise that they will not be competing on a level playing field.



Name and employment details withheld on request