Last year I looked at newly published statistics on the diversity of the magistracy in the hope that a new recruitment process had worked wonders. Unfortunately, it didn’t seem to have done. The magistrates recruited y/e March 2023 seemed to be more white and more middle class than the population and than those who applied. But the Ministry of Justice civil servants I discussed this with challenged my conclusions. They agreed on the need to increase diversity but said it was too early to judge the effect of the new process given the length of time to finalise appointments from initial application to official appointment. I can vouch for the fact the process does seem incredibly long. A friend applied to be a magistrate more than a year ago, was interviewed in March this year, told he “passed”, but has heard no more since.

Last month, the new judicial diversity data came out – the test of whether my initial concerns were justified. Alas, they seemed to be. The statistics reflecting appointments made y/e March 2024 suggest that the magistracy is not becoming more diverse and that the now not so new (started 2020) recruitment process has exacerbated the problem.

• A much smaller proportion of ethnic minority candidates for the magistracy were successful than white candidates. 30% of applicants were of an ethnic minority background but they made up only 16% of successful applicants. It’s a pity so many were turned away given that the magistracy is nowhere near representing the ethnic make-up of the population (13% of sitting magistrates vs 18% in England & Wales population). The contrast with other lay judges or those filling quasi-judicial roles is stark. 18% of Parole Board members and 18% of Lay Tribunal panel judges are from ethnic minority backgrounds. And a higher percentage of district judges than magistrates are from ethnic minority backgrounds, even though DJs need to be legally qualified so the recruitment pool is much smaller.  So why should the magistracy lag so far behind?
• The recruitment process also seems to favour middle class applicants even though the magistracy is likely to be disproportionately middle class already. Over three quarters of applicants were middle class, but their success rate was higher than for working class candidates – 42% for professionals, managers and administrators vs 30% for routine, semi-routine, manual and service workers
•  Success rates went up if applicants were 50+ or went to independent (private) school, and down if they didn’t go to university.

What to do? The recruitment process seemed to be biased in favour of white, older, middle class candidates. I’m sure they’ll make great magistrates, but I think the recruitment process needs a major overhaul. The credibility of the justice system relies on the fairness of processes and this one seemed skewed. In our latest podcast Dr Kate Leader was asked if she was Lord Chancellor, how would she reform the magistracy? She suggested maybe paying people to sit since “it’s difficult to attract people from different backgrounds”. I’m not averse to radical changes to the terms and conditions of magistrates but not convinced they are necessary to attract diverse candidates. I think good promotion and a really fair recruitment process, where no demographic seems to be favoured, could go a long way to making magistrates representatives of the people.