Judges must engage more to command confidence: former Lord Justice
Judges should engage more with the communities they serve in order to show they understand and are prepared to listen to members of those communites, according to a former Lord Justice of Appeal.
Sir Alan Moses, who now chairs the Independent Press Standards Organisation, made his comments in the foreword to a report, Rethinking Judicial Independence, published today by the charity Transform Justice, which campaigns for a better justice system.
The report is a collection of short essays edited by Penelope Gibbs, the former BBC radio producer who founded the charity in 2012, and Matthew Rogers, a freelance legal writer and researcher.
In his foreword Sir Alan observes that problems of engaging the community while maintaining independence exist at every level of the judiciary, from magistrates upwards.
"At every level, independence and authority cannot be maintained and improved merely by retreating behind a shell of silence and exclusivity", he writes. "Society suffers, and so do the judges. This report shows that judicial independence cannot serve its master, the rule of law, unless it shows greater sensitivity to the modern demands and techniques of communication."
Whereas in the past, it was believed that the best way for judges to command respect and avoid ignorant criticism was to maintain silence, cases such as the article 50 case show that "bargain with the community" being "broken, noisily and outrage".
He continues: "If judges contributed with greater vigour and clarity to an explanation of the issues involved and how the judiciary should approach them, then, at least if ignorant criticisms will not altogether be avoided, the ignorance of the criticism would be all the more apparent. The institution of the judiciary is surely, by now, of sufficient strength to withstand abuse while developing more modern and open channels of communication."
Summing up the report, Ms Gibbs comments: "Public trust in the England and Wales judiciary is still very high but, if the parameters of judicial independence do not move with the times, this may change." She calls for an "open policy-making project" to consider what judicial independence is and what it should be, engaging with all interested parties, so the judiciary can "escape from groupthink and be able to consider contrasting views before formulating new policy".