Report comment

As a female solicitor, I have always found the idea of positive discrimination extremely offensive. I know all the arguments for it, have seen the statistics and given it much thought over the years, but on the whole, I would like to think that a candidate for any position who is given a job or post on merit will be far better able to flourish in that post than one artificially assisted into it. I agree with some of the comments here - the upper judiciary is currently male heavy because of the historic numbers of male lawyers who are reaching the twilight years of their profession and are appointed - one would assume - based on their knowledge and experience. As has been said, the percentage split in the legal sector is now balancing up so it stands to reason that time will see the female population of the judiciary increasing when the appropriate time comes.

Purely thinking as a layman (I hate the term layperson and any other attempt to insert politically correct terminology), I would much rather have my legal matter adjudicated by a judge who had reached the bench because he or she merited such an appointment having demonstrated knowledge, experience and the ability to think judiciously.

To finish, as a female lawyer, I would just like to add that I didn't find the article offensive or felt in the least way attacked or slighted by the tone. I thought it was a measured commentary by a judge who has given the matter some thought, it would seem.