Lawyers backing revolution despite consultation worry

CONSTITUTIONAL SHAKE-UP: support for judicial appointments commission and supreme court

Lawyers have broadly backed the major changes to the legal system announced in the reshuffle last week, despite concerns over the lack of consultation.

The new Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) has taken over the role of the old Lord Chancellor's Department, with Lord Falconer QC replacing Lord Irvine as Lord Chancellor until legislation is passed to abolish the post.

In the wake of criticisms about the way the changes were carried out, the prime minister's official spokesman said last week that there had never been any intention to create a ministry of justice that took powers away from the Home Office.

Under the reforms, an independent judicial appointments commission will be established on a statutory basis.

A consultation paper on the best way to do this will be published before the summer recess.

There will also be a consultation before the recess on plans for a supreme court to replace the existing system of Law Lords operating as a committee of the House of Lords.

Sir Colin Campbell, first commissioner of the current Commission for Judicial Appointments - which reviews and investigates complaints about appointment procedures - said the new commission had to meet three basic criteria.

He said it must be, and be seen to be, independent of both the government and legal profession; its decisions must be transparently impartial and non-partisan; and it must apply to the appointment of judges the principles and methodologies of a modern-day, best practice human resources system.

Sir Colin added: 'This appears to be a step in the right direction but only the detail will determine whether it is a pigeon step or a giant leap.'

Lord Falconer has made it clear that he will not sit as a judge while the reforms are put in place, although under pressure from peers, he had to backtrack rapidly on his intention not to sit as speaker of the House of Lords.

He has also asked to be paid the same as other secretaries of state in the House of Lords, 96,960, rather than the 184,096 Lord Irvine was paid.

The prime minister's office made it clear that consulting on the abolition of the current system of QC appointments was high on the agenda for the DCA, along with creating a single national courts service as set out in the Courts Bill, improving the performance of courts by reducing the number of ineffective trials, and a step change in the enforcement of criminal penalties, with radical changes to the way that fines are administered and enforced.

The Law Society applauded the decision to establish the judicial appointments commission, with President Carolyn Kirby saying: 'We believe the commission will be the key to ensuring that the best people are identified fairly from the widest pool of talent.

It should help ensure that the public and people applying for judicial positions are confident that the appointment system is fair.'

A Bar Council spokesman welcomed the reforms as a 'bold and imaginative step in the right direction', while noting that the announcement 'could have been handled better'.

He said the plan for judicial appointments was along the same lines as Sir Iain Glidewell has recommended in a report for the Bar Council.

If properly resourced, a supreme court 'could do a super job', he added.

Roger Smith, director of civil liberties group Justice, welcomed the commission but said the reforms should go further.

'The Home Office should be remodelled to more of a continental ministry of the interior.

It should concentrate on operational policy and pass over responsibility for criminal law to the DCA,' he said.

Alan Beith QC, chairman of the House of Commons select committee on the Lord Chancellor's Department, criticised the lack of 'detailed preparation by the government for the fundamental constitutional changes they have announced'.

Mr Beith this week led a delegation to Edinburgh to examine the Scottish experience of setting up an independent judicial appointments board.

He said: 'Our discussions have shown that while there is general acceptance and welcome of the independent judicial appointments system, there are many complexities which have had to be resolved.'

Neil Rose