Lord Hailsham in the 1970s formally excluded gay and lesbian lawyers from entering the judiciary by allowing only married people to be appointed. Photograph: Jane Bown for the Observer
Judicial culture still deters gay and lesbian lawyers, say researchers
Guardian: Perceived hostility ‘preventing applications to become judges’
The judiciary is failing to reflect the UK’s gay and lesbian community, experts say, as research suggests it is seriously under-represented on the bench.
Research by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) law network Interlaw has found that judicial culture, the perception of hostility to gay judges and the isolated nature of the job are deterring gay and lesbian lawyers from applying for careers as judges.
The study also suggests that gay and lesbian lawyers fear that their private lives may be subject to additional scrutiny if they were to become judges. “The judiciary and sexuality are uneasy bedfellows,” said Les Moran, professor at Birkbeck, University of London, and one of those behind the study. “It is a myth that sexuality has nothing to do with the judiciary … The deafening silence on the importance of sexual diversity in the judiciary is an institutional culture that has to stop.”
The preliminary findings, which have been made public for the first time, were provided to Liberal Democrat peer Lady Neuberger, whose review of diversity in the judiciary was released earlier this year.
I cannot, personally, see why a person’s sexuality should be a qualification or disqualification for any job, let alone the difficult work of a judge but that is probably because I have never been interested in knowing about such matters of a personal nature in relation to my friends. Years ago, a very good friend of mine, who subsequently died of AIDS, was talking at dinner about the work of the Terence Higgins Trust. He talked with passion and knowledge. I asked him what attracted him to the work of this trust. He looked at me, baffled – I had known him for 20 years – and told me that he was gay, initially, as if this was some failing in me as a friend until I explained that as I had never heard him, nor, indeed, many of my friends discussing their sex lives (Some people don’t) I didn’t know and even If I had known it would not have affected my perception or judgment of him. I suspect this is true for many, if not most, people.
I went to a public school in Scotland and we were told by our Housemaster’s wife, a doctor of great charm and sense, that it was not compulsory to be homosexual, but if we were, this was not something which should be a cause for worry or angst. That was in the late sixties when attitudes were by no means the same as they are today. There is, clearly, still prejudice today – prejudice diminished, hopefully, in the so called ‘macho’ circles by a leading rugby player coming out recently and being received warmly by his friends, fellow players and many members of the public.
This is by the by – but I make the point simply to make the point that sexual orientation should not be a bar to anything.
The Guardian notes: “Sexual diversity in the judiciary has been a controversial issue for years. In the 1970s, the then lord chancellor, Lord Hailsham, formally excluded gay and lesbian lawyers from entering the judiciary, by allowing only married people to be appointed to the bench. The practice was only ended in 1991, when the then lord chancellor, Lord Mackay, allowed unmarried people to become judges. However, there are still few openly gay judges. Court of appeal judge Sir Terence Etherton, high court and international criminal court judge Sir Adrian Fulford and circuit judge Jeremy Richardson are among the few judges in England and Wales known to be gay.
“We have no idea how many gay and lesbian judges there actually are,” said Daniel Winterfeldt, partner at law firm Simmons & Simmons and founder of Interlaw. “We only know of a handful ‑ around five at the most, and some of those only by hearsay. It’s clearly a mark on the profession that so few gay and lesbian judges feel able to be visible.”
‘Big brother’ traffic cameras must be regulated, orders home secretary
Guardian: Numberplate recognition cameras routinely survey the movements of millions of motorists.
The home secretary, Theresa May, has ordered that a national police camera network that logs more than 10m movements of motorists every day be placed under statutory regulation.
Her decision means that a “Big Brother” police database that currently holds a mammoth 7.6bn records of the movement of motorists using more than 4,000 cameras across the country will have to be operated with proper accountability and safeguards.
Each entry on the database includes the numberplate, location, date, time and a photograph of the front of the car, which may include images of the driver and any passengers. These details are routinely held for two years.
Well… who would have thought that a Tory Home Secretary would be keen to ensure that civil liberties are protected? Times have changed! It is to Labour’s shame (and I vote Labour) that they allowed our civil liberties to be so eroded. ironic, given that they gave us the Human Rights Act which I regard as one of the very cornerstones of our ‘civilised’ society. Maybe the New New Labour, when they finally get back to the business of Opposition, will reflect on the fact that many Labour voters were appalled by their stance on civil liberties and have long and good memories.
Nothing like a bit of polemic – and on that note. Breakfast at a cafe and a chance to see what is happening in the parallel universe that is both The Sun and covered by The Sun.
http://www.thelawyer.com/bakers-pays-tribute-to-former-london-chief-russell-lewin/1002275.article
I am the smart arsed over aged lesbian in the comments above.
While I’ve worked at several other firms since, Bakers remains the best.
After Bakers, I took it for granted that nobody would care. That was a mistake. One firm didn’t just have an issue with gay people; women solicitors were expected to accompany clients to boxing matches etc like they were rent-a-bints rather than professional advisers. I was run out on a rail.
It’s all about conforming in the City – and I suspect (despite their independence) there are similar cultural pressures at the senior (and senior junior) Bar. This is the pool from which judges are selected.
While some judges are selected from the Legal Aid sector (where I have found a home), do they rise to and above the circuit judge level?
Of course, it shouldn’t matter. Unfortunately, the fact appears to remain that you need to socialise with the lads to be in the position to progress to the judiciary. Women and gay people of either gender are not lads.
While there are exceptions – they are exceptions.
And Hailsham allowed himself to be photographed holding hands with a cat???
Tsk!
the cat wasn’t happy about being photographed with loony, either!
White Rabbit and SW – I have no idea what Vintner you two are using these days… but I have bad news for you…. it is a small pig….. it is not a cat.
you can’t seriously call hailsham small…
…except by comparison with the giant denning, whose boots etc