Diversity progress in the family judiciary has been ‘woeful’ and could lead to declining levels of public approval, a top judge has warned.
Delivering the annual Bridget Lindley Memorial Lecture last month on the topic of race and culture in the family courts, Her Honour Judge Khatun Sapnara, designated family judge at Central Family Court, said integrating diversity, equality and inclusion in the family justice system requires a more diverse judiciary. However, in some areas, black, Asian and minority ethnic families (BAME) go through the entire court process without encountering a single BAME professional.
‘The importance and benefits of a diverse judiciary have long been accepted. Yet there has been a woeful lack of progress in respect of the appointment of BAME judges, particularly at a more senior level,’ Sapnara said.
‘To date, I believe the King’s Bench Division of the High Court has had eight judges of a BAME background. The Family Division has had none. The statistics can no longer be justified on the basis that BAME lawyers have not been working in the system long enough, or that there are insufficient numbers with the requisite merit. Diversity and merit are not mutually exclusive concepts. Something is not working.’
Sapnara, who has been involved in the judicial recruitment process, said the Judicial Appointments Commission is working hard to change the statistics. ‘We can run as many diversity initiatives as we wish; there is nothing more powerful to encourage and inspire than people seeing others in their own image simply doing the job’.
Senior judicial positions continue to be dominated by lawyers who attended fee-paying schools, Sapnara added. Her predecessor, Her Honour Judge Lynn Roberts, began a mentoring programme for black lawyers. Sapnara is also exploring a mentoring programme for white lawyers from a working-class background.
With Bar Standards Board data showing black female barristers earning significantly less than their white colleagues, Sapnara said ‘there is no escaping the fact that the only logical conclusion is that they are victims of structural discrimination’.
‘Despite recent controversies, the judiciary so far continues to enjoy high levels of public approval. That may yet be placed in jeopardy. Judges are the public face of the justice system. In more ways than one, justice has got to be done, and it has got to be seen to be done,’ Sapnara said.
