HC Deb 18 April 2000 vol 348 cc821-2
34. Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham)

What criteria the Lord Chancellor adopts in choosing to investigate complaints from members of the public against judges. [118160]

The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. David Lock)

The Lord Chancellor can investigate complaints about the personal conduct of judges. He cannot consider complaints about judicial decisions. As a general rule he will investigate any complaint that a member of the judiciary has behaved in a way that falls short of the standards that both he and the public expect. This can include allegations of inappropriate behaviour, conflict of interest or rudeness.

Dr. Cable

Is there not scope for a fully independent and transparent system of complaints to deal with cases such as that of my constituent Mr. Darbar, who spent several years in jail for a crime that he did not commit because of a mistake made by a judge—subsequently picked up in the Court of Appeal but for which no redress was possible. Another constituent, a Mrs. Hood, lost her pension because of a confusion over dates on the part of a judge in an industrial tribunal—again, with no redress forthcoming. If doctors can be struck off following complaints, why cannot judges be subject to the same discipline?

Mr. Lock

I hear what the hon. Member says. The Lord Chancellor does consider complaints against judges extremely seriously, but it is important to keep this matter in perspective. Last year, there were about 412 complaints relating to the personal conduct of judges, arising from approximately 250,000 sitting days, so the allegation that judges routinely make mistakes must be seen in the context that most of our judges are extremely hard-working, dedicated and professional servants of the public.

Angela Smith (Basildon)

Although I accept the Minister's comments, does he not accept that if there were truly independent evaluation and monitoring of judges, it would lead to greater transparency and far greater public confidence? When I raised the subject with my hon. Friend previously and suggested that he introduce Ofjudge, he said that was a novel idea. May I suggest to him that all good ideas start off by being novel? Will he reconsider?

Mr. Lock

I am always willing to listen to my hon. Friend's interesting, and perhaps novel, suggestions, but the independence of the judiciary from the Executive is a fundamental principle of our constitution and should be upheld, and any suggestion that the Executive should have a role in monitoring what judges do and the way that they do it would have to be very carefully considered to ensure that it did not infringe that very important principle of judicial independence.

Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold)

There is a suspicion among my constituents that the inflexibility of judges' working hours leads to the postponement of an unnecessary number of cases to another day, involving increased numbers of witnesses having to travel extra days to attend court. Has the spokesman of the Lord Chancellor had any complaints in that respect? If not, will he examine that problem?

Mr. Lock

I am always willing to accept complaints concerning specific instances where such a postponement has happened. The Lord Chancellor has made it entirely clear that the courts, like other public bodies, are there to serve the interests of the consumer, not to support the institution or to work in a way that is convenient for the professionals working in the system. It is essential that the consumers—the parties to the dispute and, very importantly, the witnesses—have the services that they are entitled to expect.

I invite the hon. Gentleman to write to me or my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor if he knows of any specific instances concerning unnecessary adjournments. I will ensure that they are properly investigated.