by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 05.
Oct. 2010. – 11:29:41
I am a member of a fairly large bench. With proposed court amalgamations on the horizon and its being certain my courthouse will not be closed many new faces and opinions are going to be seen and heard in the retiring room. That is to be welcomed. But what will be very unwelcome will be any attempt to import bench practices of another era which have, like the Komodo dragon, survived in a particular location.
Putting three people ideally of
mixed sex…ie the bench is two of one and one of the other and not, to use
current terminology, of mixed or trans gender [or is that fats?]………and mixed
race is the ideal that Her Majesty`s Court Service would have presiding over a
magistrates` court. I have absolutely no argument with that objective. It is
however easier in theory than in practice. As far as I am aware appointments
committees have race, gender and age in a small corner of their minds when
J.P.s are selected. Modern technology and efficient staff within the courts`
budgets has allowed my court to use quite sophisticated software to have a good
mix of colleagues to sit on up to seventy courts per week. Those of us whose
lifestyles allow a variation in available days and/or can provide the necessary
sittings over and above recommended levels will rarely sit with the same
colleague more than perhaps three or four times annually and the chances of an
identical bench sitting {except for a part heard} more than once in two or
three years is remote. And that is how it should be. All my colleagues, bar
none with whom I have discussed this system, agree.
However pre historic processes
are still retained and jealously preserved like a spider in amber by some other
courts. Within a gallon’s worth of four star at a steady 30MPH from my
courthouse the practice of a daily chairman appointing benches prevails. This
inbreeding approach is an affront to the cohesion of a bench by promoting
cliques, stifling the integration of new colleagues and distorting the public
face of the magistracy.
This and other practices can be
explained by the concept of “local justice”. The quasi independence of historic
police courts and local petty sessions still has some meaning today. This term
has been recently widely used by magistrates officially and unofficially in the
campaign to retain as many existing courts as possible. But it rides uneasily
with government emphasis on consistency across the magistrates` courts system
so far as eg appointments, training and sentencing are concerned.
If and when the process of
absorbing mainly smaller benches into their larger neighbours begins many of my
colleagues countrywide especially those most experienced and perhaps within
five years of retirement will decide they`ve had enough and put themselves out
to grass.
In 2011 the magistracy will be celebrating its 650th year. There will be pomp and ceremony and lords, ladies, judges and Secretaries of State will be toasting the fine achievements of a uniquely English system of summary justice while plotting its demise in any form resembling that which pertains currently. Enjoy the champers when it`s offered and remember he who pays the Piper-Heidsieck calls the tune.
No comments:
Post a Comment