§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Attorney General whether, in view of the number of cases now coming before the courts concerning political matters, he will give the reasons why he will not discontinue the practice of appointing as chairmen and Deputy chairmen of quarter sessions, recorderships and other judicial offices, Members of Parliament and others who take part in day-to-day party political activities, to ensure that there can be no charge of political prejudice.
50W
§ The Attorney-GeneralNo.
It is in the public interest that Members of Parliament and others who play a part in political work should be able to fill some of the large number of part-time judicial offices. I have heard no suggestion in recent years that the courts show political prejudice.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Attorney-General (1) why he will not publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT as full and detailed a statement as may be readily available giving the names and positions of persons other than Members, holding stated judicial appointments who were on appointment, or are now, actively concerned with party political activities; and whether he will take action to ensure that a limitation is placed upon such appointments in the future;
(2) why he will not publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT as full and detailed a list as may be readily available, going back to 12 months or the longest convenient period of time, whichever is the longer, the number of judges, county court magistrates, recorders, and stipendiary magistrates and others in a judicial position who have to award sentences, who, other than Members of Parliament, were prior to their appointment known to be active in party political affairs, giving the party on whose behalf political activity was carried out.
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe answer to the first part of the first Question and to the second Question is that it would not be in the public interest to do so if it were possible, which it is not. I answered the second part of the first Question on 19th April.—[Vol. 815, c.338.]