# data[].attributes.body
Library search - journal articles

# data[].attributes.body
Google search

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
representation of BME justice USA - Google Search

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
treatment of black and minority ethnic ( BME) groups within the Youth Justice. System (YJS) in the United ... noted how the USA systems have provided a lead in youth justice reform with. regard to ethnic minority issues in ..... Over- representation of BME groups within the criminal justice system at one level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report provides information about how members of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BME) Groups in England and Wales were represented in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in the most recent year for which data were available, and, wherever possible, across the last five years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two or three years ago, I was contacted by a black American judge who was on a trip to this country to meet his fellow black judges in England. He wanted to learn from their experiences and share his and those of his colleagues. He had been using the internet in order to set up meetings before his arrival. He first looked for an Association of Black or Minority Ethnic Judges which, given the different associations which exist in the US, seemed to him to be the obvious starting point. He drew a blank. He then tried to discover names of individual black judges whom he could contact. He almost drew a blank. The only name he found was mine. When he contacted me, I then put him in touch with representatives from the Bar, the Law Society and some other judges. Once in this country, he acquainted himself with the judicial diversity statistics and crime statistics. He was shocked. That is when he started to advocate the virtues of the American system, in which pressure on the politicians can play a strong part in ensuring a more diverse judiciary. Before I summarise what he found, let me tell you what this talk is going to be about.

The talk, despite its lengthy title, is in reality about diversity in the judiciary. However the title is relevant and its purpose serious, as it is intended to highlight the stark reality, because, as the American judge found - proportionally, BME members of the population are seriously over -represented in the criminal justice system, whilst BME judges are under-represented in the criminal justice system and the justice system overall. In the criminal justice system, the overwhelming majority of cases are tried by magistrates and whilst far ahead of the rest of the judiciary in terms of diversity, gender in particular, BME representation is still not optimal. We pride ourselves on having one of the finest judiciaries in the world, but from the various debates on judicial diversity, it is clear that no right-thinking person would say that it is desirable for the composition of the judiciary to stay the same.

The talk will take the following form. In the first part of the talk, I am going to look at the general population statistics, recent estimates and predictions about our demographics. Secondly, I am going to look at figures relating to the criminal justice system. Thirdly, I will deal with the figures in the two main legal professions from whence the majority of judges emanate, and then set out some recent statistics regarding the judiciary and judicial appointments. The purpose of this is to see how reflective our judiciary is of a) our society and b) the population of those who appear in the criminal justice system. The second part of the talk will also focus on the arguments for a more diverse judiciary, although I hope that the statistics themselves will have made the argument. Part three will focus on what little research there is on people's perceptions of the criminal justice system, BME respondents in particular, in order to ascertain whether the research backs up the arguments for a more diverse judiciary.

At this stage you may be wondering as the lecture series is entitled "New developments in the criminal justice system" what is new? What I hope to do in the final part of the talk, is briefly to look at developments and achievements so far as diversity is concerned in some of the Criminal Justice agencies, one in particular, and to ask what lessons can be learnt, to ensure that the judiciary and those who work in our justice system (in particular the criminal justice system) broadly reflect the society it serves.
Statistics
I am conscious that people's eyes glaze over when you mention the word statistics. Not surprisingly, it is difficult to take figures in, especially when you can't see them written down. Mastering the art of PowerPoint technology is still on my "to do" list, and although I am going to quote from a range of different statistics, I am going to keep this aspect as short as possible, whilst hopefully giving you a sense of the effect of the figures.

Let us start with demographics - the population statistics. Non-white British inhabitants 4.6m (an equal division of men and women) formed 7.9% of the population nationally in the 2001 census. This represented a growth of 53% between 1991 and 2001 from 3m. The National Statistics Office 2006 estimate of the population in mid- 2004, was that 14.7% of the population was "non-white British".

Research commissioned by the Cadbury Trust carried out by Danny Dorling, shows that at least half a dozen British towns and cities will have no single ethnic group in a majority within the next 30 years. Leicester will become the first super-diverse city in 2020, then Birmingham in 2024, followed by Slough and Luton.

How do members of the BME population fare? Let us start with schoolchildren. In 2003/2004 pupils from black Caribbean, other black and mixed white and black Caribbean groups were among the most likely to be permanently excluded from schools in England.

How do they fare in employment? 2007 figures show that employment rates for those from BME backgrounds were generally lower than those for the white population. Women are more likely to be unemployed than men. The employment rate for the population overall is 74% compared with BME figure of 60.1%. The rate for BME women is 52.1%.

What are the statistics in relation to the criminal justice system? In summary, the 2006 statistics show that relative to the general population, members of the black community are seven times more likely than their white counterparts to be stopped and searched. They are three and a half times more likely to be arrested and six times more likely to be sent to prison.

Of those sent to prison, in June 2006, members of BME groups accounted for 26% of the male prison population and 28% of the female population (including foreign nationals). For British nationals, the proportion of black prisoners relative to the population was 7.3 per 1,000 of the population compared to 1.3 per 1,000 for white persons.
The legal profession
I shall concentrate on the two main professions, although, I acknowledge that the net has widened so far as eligibility for the bench is concerned. What is the complexion of these main professions?

The 2006 figures show that women form 30% of the self-employed Bar and 46% of the employed Bar. BME barristers form 10.4% of the self- employed Bar and 15.1% of the employed Bar. Women account for less than 10% of Queens Counsel. As far as can be ascertained, there are 5 BME women and 41 men QCs- 46 out of a total of 1278. The figures for 2007 are roughly similar so far as women are concerned, but figures regarding ethnicity have significant numbers of barristers where no ethnic data is held so it is difficult to get an accurate picture.

Is the solicitor's profession more representative? As of 31st July 2006, women accounted for 43% of solicitors on the roll. (57,249) Women accounted for 42.5% (44,393) of those holding practising certificates.

(43.4% - 2007) Women formed 62.2% (6,970) of first year law students.

In the summer of 2006, 55.4% of law graduates obtained first or upper second degrees, and of those, 57.6% were women. Women accounted for 61.8% of trainees. (61.5% in 2007) As of 31st July 2007, of the 11,351 students enrolled with the Law Society, 62% were women. The 2006 figures show that only 23.2% of partners were women. (21.8% - 2007) However, the figure of women partners, it has to be noted, is more than double that of female QCs. BME solicitors accounted for 9.7% on the roll (10.1% - 2007), 9.1% of those with practising certificates (9.5% - 2007); a staggering 32.4% of first year law students and 17.5% of first year trainees (18.4% - 2007). 1505 out of 24,681 partners are from BME backgrounds - around 6%. A Black Solicitors Network survey in 2006 found that only 3% of partners in the UK top 100 law firms were of BME background and a third of those firms surveyed had no BME partners at all. So the figures within the profession at the lowest end are healthy, but fall off dramatically at the top of the profession. Is this reflected in the judicial statistics?

The percentage of women and those from BME backgrounds in the judiciary was as follows as at 1st April 2007. One woman in the House of Lords, ( 8.3%); no BME. 3 women in the Court of Appeal, (8.11%); No BME. 10 women in the High court, (9.26%); 1 BME (0.93%). 73 female Circuit judges, (11.42%); 9 BME 1.41%. 179 female Recorders, (14.9%); 53 BME (4.5%). 450 female District judges, (22.44%); BME 14, (3.11%). 219 female Deputy district judges, (28.08%); BME 30 (3.85%); 33 female District judges (MC), (23.74%); BME 7, 5.04%. 42 female Deputy district judges (MC), (24.85%); BME 9 (5.33%).

Let us look at the recent JAC competitions at high court and circuit judge level to see if there has been any change. In the high court competition, of the eligible applicants 14.58% (21) were women and 2.08% (3) were BME. Of those short-listed, 22.81(13) were women and 1.75% (1) BME. Of those on the Section 94 list, the list from which appointments were made - 14.29% (3/21) were women and no-one from BME background. Since my appointment in October 2004, there have been 37 new high court judges appointed, of which, three have been women and none from a BME background.

In the circuit judge competition, of the eligible applicants, 24% (73) were women, 7% (21) BME. Of those short listed, 25% (38) were women, 5% (8) BME. Of those on the section 94 list, 31% (32) were women, 3% (3) BME. A welcome increase in relation to the percentage of women applying and those on the section 94 list, but a disappointing decrease in the percentage of those from BME backgrounds applying and those on the section 94 list.
The arguments for diversity What is diversity?
When we talk about diversity - what do we mean? We tend to think about gender and race. One only has to look at anti-discrimination legislation to see that there are other factors at play - religion, sexual orientation, disability, age etc. Caution is always urged in relation to the issue of what constitutes diversity. Some argue that you should throw into the mix both class and education. Some ask whether we need to extend it to such attributes as attitudes, values and cultures.
Why do we need diversity?
It is said, that we have a judiciary which is highly respected both at home and abroad? If so, why do we need a more diverse judiciary? Can the notion of a more representative judiciary be reconciled with the principle of judicial impartiality? How do we measure what having a more diverse judiciary means? The general consensus of commentators is that it is desirable to have a judiciary which is broadly reflective of society. What then is the justification for a more diverse (reflective of society) judiciary? Writing on the topic yields the following main justifications:
Enhancing democratic legitimacy.
By being reflective of society, the courts are given legitimacy. Members of society are more likely to respect and trust courts whose judges include people like themselves. It increases accountability and thus public confidence.
The equity principle.
This says that it is wrong in a democratic society, in which we are all equal citizens, for authority to be wielded by such an unrepresentative section of the population.

The impact theory - that it will improve the decision making of the judiciary. There is a lack of consensus on this. Some argue that judicial impartiality means that personal characteristics have no part to play. On the other hand, there are those who are firmly of the view that women and men see the world differently and that women, by bringing a feminine perspective to bear, can play a major role in improving the quality of the system and judicial decision- making. Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin of Canada, Lady Cosgrove the first female high court judge in Scotland and Chief Justice of New Zealand, Sian Elias, are in this camp.

When considering the appointment of judges in the European Union, Kenney takes a different approach:

".....It is better to argue for the symbolic importance (in the strong sense) of women on the bench, than to fall into the trap of talking about women's essential difference from men and the distinctive "voice"(singular) they add to the bench"

Other academics argue, that judicial diversity enriches the decision- making process, because as judges interact with one another, they affect each other's views of particular cases or of the law. Deliberation is bound to sharpen legal analysis, especially in the appellate courts. There have been studies in the United States, and to a very limited degree, in this country, on the effect of gender on decision- making. The results are largely inconclusive. Where there is some support for the effect of diversity, it is in the area where there is collective decision-making such as the appellate courts.
Merit vs. diversity
In this country, statute lays down that merit is the sole test for judicial appointment. How is merit defined? Is diversity an "add- on" or is it part of merit? The chairman of the JAC refers to "Diversity in the field - merit in the selection"....

However, the issue of whether there is a tension between merit and diversity deserves some close attention. How should merit be defined? Is it a moving target, depending on the demands of the job in question? So far as judicial appointments are concerned, how far should diversity be part of merit? The Bar Council has suggested that diversity needs to be fed into the test of merit, so that an understanding of and ability to deal appropriately with diversity issues will count in a candidate's favour when assessing the application. The relevant experience of, or derived from, backgrounds, perspectives, cultures and other diverse circumstances, should, it is said, be part of the strengths that a candidate offers and therefore properly considered in the assessment of merit.
Research into perceptions in the criminal justice system
I turn now to look at some of the research which has been conducted on perceptions of the justice system, with particular emphasis on BME respondents, to see if they support any of the arguments for diversity. There is a paucity of research in relation to the narrow issue of perceptions of the make up of the judiciary. Most of the comments about judges and lawyers in the system have been in the context of wider research. The 2004/2005 Section 95 report - "Race and the Criminal Justice System" found that relative to white people, BME groups reported higher levels of perceived discrimination within the Criminal Justice system. 31% of those BME persons surveyed felt that they would be treated worse than people of other races, by one or more of the five agencies in the Criminal Justice System. This represents little change to the findings in 2001-3.

In the research entitled Policing and public perceptions of the Criminal Justice System, findings from the 2004-2005 British Crime Survey in which 2001 people were surveyed, revealed that people from ethnic minorities expressed a higher level of confidence than white people on most of the criminal justice measures and ratings of agencies. However, they were less likely to be confident that a) the system respected the rights of the black accused and treated them fairly and b) that BME witnesses were treated as well as white people. Only 26% thought that judges were doing a good or excellent job.

Phase one of a DCA research programme back in 2002-3 was entitled "Race and the Courts". This included a number of studies which dealt with users' experiences of the courts in relation to criminal, housing and care proceedings. With regard to criminal proceedings, the majority of defendants in the Crown courts did not believe that they had received unfair treatment due to their race. However, the minority ethnic defendants felt that having more minority ethnic jurors would increase their confidence in the courts. Even the judges surveyed agreed that more should be done to avoid the impression that the courts are "white dominated" institutions.

The "Courts and Diversity research programme" included research entitled "Tribunals for diverse users". This found evidence that those minority groups most likely to perceive unfairness at hearings, were less likely to do so, where the tribunal itself was ethnically diverse. There was also separate research on minority ethnic magistrates' experiences of the role and the court environment. That research found that there was strong support for the proposition that more magistrates and court staff from the local minority ethnic populations should be recruited to increase confidence in the courts. There was also a feeling amongst the magistrates that they did not progress as quickly as their white counterparts. The three studies did show to a certain degree therefore, that the lack of diversity in those presiding over judicial proceedings had an effect on the confidence of minority ethnic people in the fairness of the proceedings.

A recent publication entitled "Perceptions of racial discrimination by public services" a Communities and Government publication (2007), when looking at perceptions of the courts, found that respondents expected the courts to be fair, because of the independence of the judiciary from the legislative system, the public nature and openness of proceedings and the confidence in the fairness of the law itself. However, there were some with a basic distrust of the courts, based on perceptions of harsher sentences for BME defendants, and a feeling that the law was interpreted by "conservative old male judges who are disconnected from reality". To put it in the words of the researchers:- " the homogenous socio-demographic profile of judges was one of the main reasons why those from BME backgrounds expected to be discriminated against in our courts" In its conclusions, the authors recommended that the drive to increase the diversity of the judges be pursued, so that they better reflect the communities they serve. It also recommended that the effectiveness of current diversity awareness training amongst judges and magistrates should be assessed for its impact on service delivery and outcomes in relation to people from BME backgrounds.

The most recent research into perceptions published in March of this year in the Ministry of Justice research series, is entitled "Just satisfaction. What drives public and participant satisfaction in the courts and tribunals." The report is a review of certain studies done from 2000 onwards, including some outside our jurisdiction. The general conclusion was that the data on the overall satisfaction with courts and tribunals is contradictory. General levels of public esteem for the courts and judges appear low. There was a paucity of research on diversity, even in this wide-ranging review. The studies referred to turned out to be the ones I have just referred to with one additional reference.

Standing back and looking at this very limited research - the most that one can say, is that there is some, but limited evidence, to support the theory that the lack of diversity in the judiciary does affect public confidence in the system.
Developments in diversity in the criminal justice system
Many more Criminal Justice agencies are employing proportionally more people from BME communities. For example, the Prison Service has met its targets for minority ethnic representation (4.4%), with the proportion of BME officers standing at 4.6% in 2005/6. The Serious Fraud Office and Youth Offending Teams had the highest BME representation at 22% and 17% respectively. The Office for Criminal Justice Reform in the Ministry of Justice has been working to ensure that agencies collect the data they need to enable more effective ethnic monitoring.

What of the police? As of 31.3.2007, there were 141,892 full time equivalent police officers in the 43 police forces of England and Wales. Women form about 23% of the force, with BME forming 3.9%. Like the legal professions, there is a serious under- representation at senior level, so far as BME officers are concerned. They account for 2.6% of officers at Chief Inspector level and above and 4.2% of constables. Women fare better and account for 15% of officers of Chief Inspector and above, (up from 10%) and 26% at constable rank.

I want, for a moment, to focus on the progress made in the Crown Prosecution Service with regard to diversity. In July 2001 David Calvert Smith QC, the then DPP, accepted the independent report by Sylvia Denman which found that the CPS was institutionally racist. He said this: "Without intending to be, our behaviour can, does and has discriminated. Therefore I unreservedly accept the finding that as an organisation the CPS has been, within the Lawrence report definition, institutionally racist." He went on to say that he wanted the CPS to be a " paragon within British society in the way we deliver our service and the way our employees are treated" His successor, Ken Macdonald when launching the 2003-4 "Annual Equalities in Employment" report echoed those sentiments.

The Annual Equalities in Employment report 2005-6, shows that there was a steady increase in the overall number of black and minority ethnic people employed by the CPS since 2005, making up then 15.2% of the overall workforce. Overall, the CPS had exceeded the 2005 Labour Force Survey (LFS) benchmark for representation of women and black and minority ethnic people. The growth, it appears, had been assisted by the setting of targets, which, it was said, are a key strand in realising any organisation's equality and diversity agenda. They serve to ensure the organisation implements a range of initiatives to develop a workforce which is representative of the communities it serves and where all employees can aspire to reach their full potential. In setting their targets for 2008, the CPS has taken into account the proportions of each particular demographic group in the wider labour market, in the wider Civil Service and in the CPS.

The HM Crown Inspectorate report (2006) entitled - "Equalities driving justice" - a review of equality and diversity in employment practice in the CPS, was positive in its conclusions. It found that commitment at the top had been backed up by changes to governance structures, the development of a strong Equality and Diversity Unit and a good level of engagement with both internal and external stakeholders to support change. Standards for behaviour in the workplace and flexible working arrangements were in place to help make for a more attractive career opportunity.

The Cabinet Office Capability Review Report on the CPS in June 2007 was also very positive.

We can see from the figures I have cited, that "aspirational" targets as opposed to quotas, seemed to have worked in the Civil Service. I pause here to observe, that I have been misquoted in the press, as advocating quotas. This I have never done. However, I am interested in the question - are targets appropriate in judicial selection? Even if they are not, what can be learnt from the initiatives put in place in pursuance of targets in organisations such as the CPS?
The future of judicial diversity
So what about the future of judicial diversity? Considerable work is being done by the Ministry of Justice, the Judicial Appointments Commission and the Judicial Office, which have a trilateral strategy. The judiciary itself and the professions are also working to address the issue. Time does not allow for me to go into the detail of the work. However, the time has come, it seems to me, for there to be consideration and engagement by those outside the professions and the judiciary as to the kind of judiciary they want to see in the 21st century. To this end, it is hoped to have a conference on the topic, but this will not be in the immediate future. Moreover, it is not the only forum in which these questions can be asked. I see before me a wealth of diverse talent and experience. Many of you here today, may well have ideas as to how you think that diversity in the judiciary, and indeed the Criminal Justice System can be enhanced. If you do, please let me know. It may be that research is required. For example, Dr Abbas in his review of research on ethnic inequalities entitled "Diversity in the senior judiciary" commissioned by the former Commissioner for Judicial Appointments (October 2005), concluded that qualitative research is needed to examine the processes of applications, interview and appointment to the senior judiciary in order to determine what works and how further to develop opportunities for ethnic minorities, whose representation at the lower levels is increasing. With the advent of the Judicial Appointments Commission, it is to be hoped that such research will be possible. Whatever issues emerge, their resolution should have the common aim of maintaining a judiciary of which we can continue to be proud, which includes, of course, the desirability of having a judiciary which better reflects the society it serves.

Instead of the traditional question and answer session, I want to turn the tables by asking you questions. How important is it to have a diverse judiciary and why? What measures do you think can be taken to increase diversity in the judiciary and the justice system generally? What skills should a 21st judge have? Do you think the perceptions of those BME defendants interviewed for the research of "out of date judges" is fair? If so, what do you think can be done to change the image? Can any diversity initiatives you have experience of be transposed to the judicial workplace? How does diversity fit into a test of merit? I welcome your views on what is just a sample of the many questions there are to be answered.
The Honourable Mrs Justice Dobbs DBE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The judge and the defendant: demographics and diversity in the criminal justice system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two or three years ago, I was contacted by a black American judge who was on a trip to this country to meet his fellow black judges in England. He wanted to learn from their experiences and share his and those of his colleagues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the year since Michael Brown was killed, Americans have focused their attention on the harsh treatment of black Americans at the hands of police. A shocking number have been killed in encounters with police, in the year since Ferguson and in the years before. Thousands more have suffered subtler forms of discrimination in the criminal justice system, where social science research shows striking racial disparities at nearly every level-from arrest rates, to bail amounts, to sentence lengths, to probation hearing outcomes. We combed a vast body of research to find the clearest indicators of racial disparities at different phases of the justice process. The eight charts below offer a grim portrait of what it's like to be a black American in our nation's justice system.
1. Black Americans are more likely to have their cars searched.
Police are three times as likely to search the cars of stopped black drivers than stopped white drivers, as the chart below, based on data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, illustrates. Nationally, black drivers are also more likely to be pulled over and less likely to receive a reason for being stopped. In one Rhode Island study, black drivers were stopped more even though they were less likely to receive a citation.
2. Black Americans are more likely to be arrested for drug use.
Police arrest black Americans for drug crimes at twice the rate of whites, according to federal data, despite the fact that whites use drugs at comparable rates and sell drugs at comparable or even higher rates.
3. Black Americans are more likely to be jailed while awaiting trial.
A 2014 study in New York City showed that blacks were more likely than whites or nonblack minorities to be in jail while they await trial, even after controlling for the seriousness of charges and prior record. Other research suggests that this disparity is often due to the fact that black defendants cannot afford to pay bail. The temporary incarceration stigmatizes the defendant, disrupts family life and employment, and makes it harder for the defendant to prepare a defense. In the chart below, "jail" refers to defendants who were offered bail but could not post it; "remanded" refers to defendants who were not given the option of posting bail.

4. Black Americans are more likely to be offered a plea deal that includes prison time.

The same study in New York found that black defendants are more likely to be offered plea deals that include prison time than whites or nonblack minorities. Even after controlling for many factors, including the seriousness of charges and prior record, blacks were 13 percent more likely than whites to be offered such deals.
5. Black Americans may be excluded from juries because of their race.
Researchers found that North Carolina prosecutors were excluding black people from juries in capital cases at twice the rate of other jurors, even when controlling for legitimate justifications for striking jurors, such as employment status or reservations about the death penalty. Other studies have shown that excluding black people from juries can influence deliberations and verdicts. For example, black defendants in capital cases with white victims are less likely to receive a death sentence if there is a black juror.
6. Black Americans are more likely to serve longer sentences than white Americans for the same offense.
A 2012 working paper found "robust evidence" that black male federal defendants were given longer sentences than comparable whites. Black men's sentences were, on average, 10 percent longer than those of their white peers. This is partly explained by the fact that prosecutors are about twice as likely to file charges against blacks that carry mandatory minimum sentences than against whites.
7. Black Americans are more likely to be disenfranchised because of a felony conviction.
Most U.S. states restrict the voting rights of citizens convicted of crimes. Since black Americans are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, voter disenfranchisement has a disproportionate effect on the black population. According to recent estimates from the Sentencing Project, 2.5 percent of all Americans are disenfranchised due to a current or past felony conviction. For blacks, the figure is 7.7 percent, or about 1 in 13.
8. Black Americans are more likely to have their probation revoked.
Black convicts have their probation revoked more often than whites and other minorities, according to a recent study of probation outcomes in Iowa, New York, Oregon, and Texas. These racial disparities held even when the study controlled for other characteristics of the probationers, such as their age, crime severity, and criminal history. In the chart below, the "unexplained" portion of each bar is the level of racial disparity that could not be explained by nonracial characteristics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
racial discrimination in the criminal justice system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
is there racial discrimination in arrests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Eight Charts That Show How the Justice System Is Stacked Against Black Americans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the year since Michael Brown was killed, Americans have focused their attention on the harsh treatment of black Americans at the hands of police. A shocking number have been killed in encounters with police, in the year since Ferguson and in the years before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Top names from law and politics gather to discuss legal profession's diversity problem

David Lammy, the barrister turned MP for Tottenham, believes he won't see a Lord Chief Justice from a black minority ethnic (BME) background in his lifetime, but is hopeful the Supreme Court may gain a non-white justice in the same time period.

In an impassioned talk about race in the justice system given in the Caledonian Club near Hyde Park yesterday, Lammy expressed resentment at what he calls the profession's interpretation of "merit" as "white, male and middle class". He encouraged the use of judicial targets, however, he didn't go as far as to push for quotas, as these are "problematic".

The Lord Chief Justice is the formal head of the judiciary of England and Wales and, in its 150-year history, has never been held by a woman nor a BME man. Though there had been speculation that 2017 would see a female take the post, it was Ian Burnett who was eventually promoted to the role, in October.

Lammy - who some believe is a contender to be the next leader of the Labour Party - is more hopeful about better BME representation at the Supreme Court. Though the country's most important bench has had a gender diversity spruce since the appointment of Lady Black and the promotion to presidency of Lady Hale, it's still all-white.

Lammy was called to the bar in 1994, after becoming the first black Briton to study at Harvard (where he did a masters degree). After arriving late to the Westminster Legal Policy Forum event because of overrunning parliamentary business, he said:

"I've been qualified for more than 20 years, and I know plenty of BME lawyers who qualified before me. There are plenty of BME lawyers out there who are senior enough to be senior judges, and yet, they aren't."

On why this was, Lammy said the appointments commission was unable to tell him why BME lawyers' applications aren't successful ("if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck..." he said). Sometimes, he continued, BME lawyers stop applying for senior judicial positions because the constant rejection is "embarrassing".

The ethnic diversity of the country's judiciary is an important issue, particularly in criminal law.

The low percentage of BME lawyers compared to clients has created a "trust deficit", SOAS graduate Lammy said. Having been commissioned by then Lord Chancellor Michael Gove to review the justice system ("on the understanding I wouldn't be leaving the Labour Party and joining the Conservatives!" he laughed), Lammy recommended the government sets "a clear, national target to achieve a representative judiciary and magistracy by 2025". However, the government rejected this proposal.

More generally, the importance of diversity was a recurring theme in yesterday's seminar. The first keynote speaker, Herbert Smith Freehills employment lawyer and Legal Service Board member Jemima Coleman, described diversity as "a public interest issue, and an interest of justice issue".

At the Westminster Legal Policy Forum Keynote Seminar today - employment lawyer and @LSB_EngandWal member Jemima Coleman tells audience there are a number of diversity issues that cut across the sector, including: mental health and disability pic.twitter.com/SPGvfeSxas

- Katie King (@legalcheek_kk) March 8, 2018

Perhaps the most interesting debate explored where the diversity problem in the legal profession truly lies. Catherine Baksi, a barrister turned freelance journalist, focused on the problems of access to the profession.

She highlighted the extreme costs required to enter the profession (for example, it's estimated training to be a barrister will set you back £127,000 when you add up course fees and associated living costs). The "overemphasis" on securing a law degree, which she thinks you don't need to be able to be a good lawyer, means "strives made by the profession in diversity are being pushed back because of the cost of university".

The hope is that upcoming reforms to legal education in both the solicitors' profession and at the bar will help ease this. But Baksi advocated a more radical change: a Chartered Institute of Legal Executive (CILEx)-style route into law, which shifts the focus away from university education towards on-the-job training. This would be cheaper and create a more diverse profession.

Stanford-educated Andrew Fairbairn - who runs a social mobility programme in London called SEO - thinks effort should be focused not on access to the profession, but retention.

"There are so many diverse candidates getting multiple [training contract] offers from multiple firms," Fairbairn noted, "and that piece of the puzzle has a lot of groups behind it". There is less momentum behind initiatives looking at what happens to more diverse candidates once they're through the door; are they being given the opportunity to rise? "The evolution of the discussion should be about: retention, retention, retention," he finished.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
David Lammy: 'We will not see a BME Lord Chief Justice in my lifetime' - Legal Cheek

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Top names from law and politics gather to discuss legal profession's diversity problem David Lammy, the barrister turned MP for Tottenham, believes he won't see a Lord Chief Justice from a black minority ethnic (BME) background in his lifetime, but is hopeful the Supreme Court may gain a non-white justice in the same time period.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
riminal justice has among the lowest proportion of senior staff from black and minority ethnic backgrounds. Research published last week by consultants Green Park found that while 6.6% of leaders in NHS trusts and on average 4.2% in local government are from a black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) background, only 3% come from this background in the criminal justice system. This compares to 12.8% of the working age population who described themselves as BAME in the 2011 census, 7.3% of senior leaders in FTSE 100 companies and 7% of senior leaders in public services.

Last week's analysis follows a government-commissioned interim report by the Labour MP David Lammy last year, which found that people from minority backgrounds are more likely to be jailed for certain crimes than those who are white. They are over-represented at almost all stages of the criminal justice system. So defendants from minority communities appear more frequently than the population average while those who pass judgment on them are older and whiter than their peers.

That stark disparity in the courtroom has spurred on two experienced magistrates, Jacqueline Macdonald-Davis and Jessica Baldwin, to try and improve the ethnic diversity of the bench.

As members of the London magistrates' advisory committee, they are coordinating the search for 350 new justices of the peace, volunteers prepared to spend at least 13 days a year unpaid in the capital's 23 magistrates courts.

But Macdonald-Davis and Baldwin fear their efforts are being hampered by cuts to the Ministry of Justice's advertising budget and social changes which appear to be narrowing the class and professional range from which the magistracy is drawn.

On a recent Wednesday morning, Macdonald-Davis and Baldwin sat in the back of a Westminster magistrates court. A Chinese defendant, described on the charge sheet as a man, turned out to be a woman. A Lithuanian, with a string of aliases, pleaded guilty to stealing a Transit van from a delivery driver. A gay woman, accused of punching her partner in a hotel, was remanded.

"It's a snapshot of London," says Baldwin. "If you treat people with respect sometimes their demeanour changes. That's why you need magistrates who live and work in the community."

Around 23% of magistrates in London and 11% nationally are from minority communities, whereas 40% of London's population and 14% of England and Wales is non-white.

Penelope Gibbs, a former magistrate and director of the organisation Transform Justice, says: "However good they are, we need magistrates to be truly representative of the communities they serve if trust in the criminal justice system is to be maintained. We don't have enough BAME magistrates, and those we have are overwhelmingly middle-class and middle-aged. Where are the magistrates from the Somali, Roma and Romanian communities? Nowhere to be seen."

There is also concern about the slow progress of ethnic minority candidates being appointed as judges. In June, figures from the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), which oversees selection of legally qualified judges, showed that BAME candidates made up 23% of deputy district judge applicants but only 6% of recommendations for appointment. "The rule of law requires a fully diverse judiciary," says Robin Allen QC, the chair of the Bar Council's equality and diversity committee. "Once again the figures reveal the urgent need for positive action to make BAME applicants more successful."

The lack of a diverse judiciary is having a detrimental impact on defendants' confidence that they will have a fair hearing. In a report earlier this year, Transform Justice found that ethnic minority defendants have little faith in the criminal justice system. It quoted one teenager recalling his experience: "It was me against them. Coming from an Asian Muslim background, I didn't see anyone with a common background. My mistrust started with the police ...

"As for judges and magistrates, they were the last people I trusted - elderly, white English people and that's not what I see in society outside. They don't understand what I've gone through or my culture. They don't take into account anything you say, no common ground at all."

Macdonald-Davis, who works in health education, is determined to change that: "When you work in London, it's important that anyone who appears before the bench feels that it's representative," she says. "We would like to feel that people who are coming in here are being listened to and ... that the bench might have an understanding of their world."

In the absence of an advertising budget for magistrates' posts, Macdonald-Davis is working with organisations such as Black Vote to widen the pool of candidates.

But she fears the magistracy is becoming more middle class. "It's increasingly difficult to get time off," she observes. "Much of the training is in the evening. We should be encouraging people to do voluntary work. More employers could be accommodating."

Baldwin, a journalist, agrees: "We have a preponderance of lawyers. The number of people who say to me: 'I thought I had to be a lawyer'... No, you don't. We are missing people in the army, we are missing nurses, there are a lot of occupations not represented. The nature of all jobs makes it more difficult. The backgrounds have become slightly more narrow."

The Magistrates' Association, however, does not believe that there is a major problem with a lack of ethnic representation. "We take the view that the bench [does not need to be] representative of society," says a spokesman. "Justice is blind, after all. [But] we do want to see a bench that ... engenders confidence in it. One under-represented group is age rather than ethnicity. The majority of magistrates (52%) are, in fact, women. We need to broaden the age range. We want employers to be flexible enough so their staff can contribute to the administration of justice."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The magistrates on a mission to court greater diversity | Owen Bowcott

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jacqueline Macdonald-Davis and Jessica Baldwin are spearheading a campaign to court greater diversity among volunteers to the bench

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last modified: 02/02/18 Author: Law student

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Law Essay Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of LawTeacher.

Why, If At All, Do We Need A More Diverse Judiciary?

The Judiciary (also known as judicature) is made up of the various courts in a country that interprets and applies the law created by the sovereign body, which in the United Kingdom is Parliament. The apex of this court system in the UK as of October 1st 2009 is the Supreme Court which previously was the House of Lords and headed by the Lord Justice.

The courts do not make laws; they only interpret them after they have been created. This process is clearly defined by the Separation of powers, which states that each organ of Government shall have a clearly defined function, in order to prevent confusion or abuse of power by any of the organs. The judiciary is very important in governance. Not only do they interpret and enforce the law in the country, they also provide various institutions and mechanisms for resolving disputes. Further diversity is needed in the judiciary to address the growing diversity in society itself, for example, most countries now comprise people of various races, languages, cultures and religions. Gender diversity is also becoming more important as women seek equal rights with men. All the foregoing has resulted from improvements in transportation and education creating a universally mobile workforce. There are now large numbers of ethnic and racial minorities in most countries, the UK inclusive.

Diversity is a reality created by individuals and groups from a broad spectrum of demographic and philosophical differences. It is extremely important to support and protect diversity because by valuing individuals and groups in a manner free from prejudice, and by fostering a climate where equity and mutual respect are intrinsic, we create a fair society, which is needed for a country to run smoothly.

From the founding of the judiciary in the United Kingdom, the composition of the judges at the top of the judicial system have comprised mainly upper class older white males, with hardly any female judges or judges from ethnic minorities. The major breakthrough for female judges in the profession was by Baroness Hale in 2004 when she became the United Kingdom's first woman Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and in 2009 she became the first female justice of the Supreme Court. Statistics of the number of female and non-white judges show a misrepresentation of these minorities. Figures taken from the 2007 statistics show that there are no female heads of divisions and only one in the Supreme court, ethnic minorities make up 0.9 of the High court's and above, females make up 8.3% of the Courts of Appeal, 9.3 % of the high courts, while ethnic minorities make up 0.9%, 1.4% of the circuit courts and 4.4% of the recorders. However, the lower courts have better representation, both in ethnic minorities and women. In the Deputy District courts, women make up to 28.1% of the figures, and ethnic minorities make up to 3.5%, whilst in the District courts 23.7% of the judges are women with only 5.15 of the judges been from ethnic minorities.

This does not efficiently reflect the country's diverse population, as national statistics show; Britain is becoming more and more diverse as there are now people from different backgrounds and races entering the country. If that is the case then a large section of the population are ethnic minorities. Also, more than half of the population is female, why do women for example make up less than 20% of judges in courts? This shows how poorly represented these groups are in the Judiciary, this may mean their rights are not being properly safeguarded, and may eventually lead to the infringement and violation of such rights. If the judiciary is using a loose construction towards interpretation, then a very narrow homogeneous group of upper middle class older white men are not necessarily going to reflect the views and values of society as a whole, particularly on issues involving diverse cultural and generational matters because they would require more perspectives, as the judges would interpret and enforce law based on their own background.

Many Scholars in the legal profession have complained about the lack of diversity in the United Kingdom judicial system, including Lord Robert Taylor the 1992 Lord Chancellor when he said "The present imbalance between male and female., white and black in the judiciary is obvious..............I have no doubt that the balance will be redressed in the next few years" meaning that it is indeed a big problem. Many of these scholars trace this problem back to the appointment process for higher judges. If the process were more diverse, there would be more chances of minorities been in the higher courts. But the process has been criticized and said to be biased as the Lord Chancellor has too much influence on the process. A lot of emphasis is placed on the "old boy" network were majority of the new appointments come from sets of barristers whose ex-members were judges. There have been no female Lord Chancellors and none from ethnic minorities. There are only a smaller number of female judges in total and the number of judges from ethnic minorities is only 1% of the total number of judges. Majority of the judges that have been appointed went to private schools and graduated from Oxbridge. They represent a minimal portion of the population as less than half of the population has had this experience. Their life experience and ideologies differ considerably from the rest of the population. How then are they meant to effectively interpret and enact the law to citizen fairly and efficiently if they do not share the same back ground as more than half of the population?. It could also be difficult for the judges as they may not be able to relate to some of the situations put before them. Robert Stevens examined the judiciary and recommended the introduction of positive action and the commission for appointing judges in order to open up the opportunities for women and those from ethnic minorities.

A more diverse judiciary is desirable because without one, the chances are greatly increased for a violation of the rights on these under represented and could indirectly imply discrimination especially on both gender and race. How else can one explain the lack of women and ethnic minorities in the courts? It is not that they are not qualified enough. Most universities have stated in the news and on newspapers that there are a higher number of female students in their universities than men. Why do women not occupy these high paying jobs and positions in the same proportions as men if they all have equal qualifications?

The United Kingdom parliament enacted the Race Relations Act 1976, which was to prevent discrimination based on race. If there is a misrepresentation of ethnic minorities in the judiciary, how would this Act be properly and fairly upheld? The case of Hasanali Khoja Vs the Metropolitan Police shows some evidence of this fact. Mr. Khoja a British citizen of both Indian and Muslim decent was employed by the Metropolitan police and head of the catering department. He claimed his rights were infringed upon when he informed his employers that he would be unable to cook food that contain pork as it is against his religion, but his employers insisted that he make pork sausages and bacon. He took the Metropolitan police to court and sued on the grounds of both Religious and Racial Discrimination and he lost the case. The judge's decision was not in favour of the claimant. This shows how poorly represented some minorities are in the judiciary. His lawyer later claimed that the judge's decision did not uphold the claimants freedom of expression, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, because he had the right not to cook pork and his employers by law are meant to accommodate his choice but they did not and were not punished for infringing on this right. If the judges that ruled over that case shared the same background as the defendant, be it Muslim or Indian the judgment may have been different because they may have had better understood the claimant's position.

This lack of diversity in the judiciary can also lead to discrimination based on race especially when it comes to immigration issues. This is evident in the case of East African Asians vs. United Kingdom 1983, where the husbands of UK citizens were not allowed entrance to the UK despite the Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1962 which stated that citizens of the Commonwealth countries have guaranteed access to the United Kingdom. Despite this legislation these men were still denied access into the country. This case went against the Act and clearly violated the rights of claimants, as by deliberately singling out a group of people and subjecting them to differential treatment on the basis of race is racial discrimination and torture which goes against Article 3 of the Human Rights Act. It also violated article 8 and 14 because by refusing Commonwealth husbands of British citizen into the country, where the wives of these men have already gained entrance into the country constituted an intrusion with family life and discrimination contrary to both articles, it also went against article 5 which is right to liberty and security of person the right is guaranteed and should be protected especially when there is an interference of that right by a public authority.

Also insufficient representation may sometimes compromise the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 which is meant to protect both men and women against discrimination based on gender or marriage. The small number of women in the higher courts implies that they are not been appointed into those positions merely because of their gender. If it were a female judge that presided over the case of Andrea Madarassy vs. Nomura International then the chances of her winning the case might have been higher. The claimant took the case to an employment tribunal complaining of unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, victimisation and contravention of the Equal Pay Act. After a long 5 week court hearing the tribunal ruled in favour of Nomura international instead of Andrea, they ruled that the company had not discriminated against the claimant, but according to Aurura press archive Mrs. Madrassy is not the only woman to have complained of unfair treatment by Nomura. Also, according to the Telegraph, Maureen Murphy and Anna Francis, in November 2009 sued the company on sexually related allegations as well. However, on both of these occasions the women have lost the cases and both occasions the panels of judges have been men. Hence it's not a surprise that they lost the cases. If, however, the cases were heard by a female judge, she would be in a better position to understand were the claimants was coming from and would be in the position to make a fairer judgment as she may have shared the same views and experiences as the claimant as they of the same sex. Although the judgment may be biased it may also be fair. This, however, just goes to show that when an individual or a group of people are been judged, in court be it for tort, contract, criminal offence etc, the judgment is indirectly affected by their racial background, gender, socio-economic status or one legally irrelevant characteristic which should not be considered when passing a fair judgment.

Diane Abott a British MP emphasized, in her article, 'Multi Racial Britain', that "Ever since the Norman French invaded Anglo-Saxon Britain has been a culturally diverse nation". Which should mean that the values and attitudes which colour our views of the world, should be effectively engrossed and interpreted in the law and the only way for that to happen is to a have a more diverse judiciary, in terms of factors such age but most importantly gender and ethnicity, which would effectively reflect the ideas of the society as a whole. But this is not the case in British judiciary system presently.

Judges have judicial independence, which itself is as a result of the [3]doctrines of the separation of powers in the eighteenth century which stated that the three primary functions of the state legislature, judiciary and executive must be kept separate in order to safeguard the rights of citizens and to ensure the rule of law. Judges, being human, would only promote and safeguard the rights of citizens who share similar views as them. Judges are said to be pre-established and conservative, they already have set rules, ideologies and beliefs which is precarious as most of them do not tally with beliefs of majority of the population. Hence, they can get away with making partial decisions as judges have immunity from being sued for judgment delivered in the course with their judicial duties. If their judgment is unfair or biased in any way, they cannot be made to account for such a decision. This consequence arising from very narrow views, beliefs and ideologies can be seen as undemocratic, as democracy is governance by the majority and not the minority. This further underscores why a more diverse judiciary is desired.

According to Honorable James Andrew Wynn, Jr, in his article Judicial diversity: when Independence meets Accountability, the more diverse a judiciary is the greater the judicial accountability and judicial independence. Judicial independence pre-supposes that judges are non-biased and make impartial decisions, while greater accountability is expected from popular and greater representation. Hence, if there is no diversity within a judiciary the chances of gaining either judicial independence or judicial accountability are farfetched, almost impossible. In REPUBLICAN PARTY OF MINNESOTA et al. v. WHITE, CHAIRPERSON, MINNESOTA BOARD OF JUDICIAL STANDARDS, et al, Judge Scalia clearly stated that "lack of judicial predisposition is neither desirable nor possible". That statement conforms to the expectation that a judge's judgment is based on his background, i.e. his racial, gender and ethnic experience. A judge's ability to hear a case, interpret it and pass judgment is based on his coherent diverse experience and views. This then means that any judgments without considerable ideological and narrative judicial diversity or experiences without the relative advantage of an accountable or fairly independent judiciary would be biased and partial.

Democratic institutions must have the consent and respect of the citizens. This applies to the judiciary as well, and would be lost if judicial decisions are not regarded as "in touch" with mainstream views and development. As Justice Atken said "The public will have faith that the court will be impartial and be able to recognise and eliminate conscious bias". A more diverse judiciary would increase public confidence and gain greater support from its citizen. If the citizens know they are being properly represented in the courts and that there are people there who share the same background as them they would be more comfortable and willing to comply with the rules and regulations of the country. It would also be beneficial to the judges because if they have a diverse pool of people from different backgrounds, gender and cultures in the judiciary then there would be more skills and experiences to gain from when passing judgment as it would equip the judges with the experience, views and values they would need to make good and fair judgments.

Increasing the number of women and ethnic minorities in the judicial system, would also encourage people from different groups to aspire to become judges. Knowing that they have a chance to break that glass ceiling, would encourage more students to read law related courses knowing that they have a chance to become a top judge in the country. This would benefit and ease the appointment process as they would have a much wider and more diverse pool of applicants to pick from and this would thereby encourage more and more diversity and it may even have an effect on the diversity in the other main organs of government the legislature and the executive.

Judicial restraint is defined as the theory or guideline of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of personal opinion when passing a judgment by basing their decisions on the grounds that have been previously defined by judicial precedents. This theory is practised in the United Kingdom judiciary, and there is less scope for this matter in interpretation and judges are trained and aware that they must interpret the law using the legal principles, and not unduly follow their own prejudices. This can be shown in the case of Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), where Judge Scalia stated "I would have been delighted to throw Mr. Johnson in jail. Unfortunately, as I understand the First Amendment, I couldn't do it". This just goes to show that judicial restraint limits a judge's ability to pass judgment based on personal opinion. Hence, even if the composition of the judiciary is not as diverse as the population there are laws within the constitution that protect the rights of the citizens as a whole. Lack of judicial diversity would be less harmful if this doctrine is carried out well. However, this doctrine contradicts with judicial independence because even if judges do not practise judicial restraint when presiding over a case and make a judgment that is biased, they cannot be sued. They can only be made to account if the judgment completely goes against the rights of the citizen.

From the foregoing, it is clear that the judiciary is a key organ in the running of a Country as without it to enforce the law and regulations and act as a guide to prevent disorder and chaos in the Country, there would be anarchy and confusion. In order for this to happen effectively and efficiently there has to be a fair composition of judges from various backgrounds, ethnicities and gender to carry out this function. Diversity is necessary to enforce key acts and prevent discrimination and infringements of the rights of the citizens in a country, it is also necessary to reflect the rainbow of cultures, ages, genders, religions etc that make up the United Kingdom as a whole. It is a key factor required for the smooth running in a democratic state. Diversity will assist the judiciary of the country to be both accountable and independent from any criticism from other organs of Government and the citizens, which would give the judiciary the full support of the citizens in the Country, many of whom will be motivated to study Law and become judges themselves. It is also needed if the judges in the country do not carry out the doctrine of judicial restraint as well as they are supposed to, because without judicial restraint the judgments passed by the judges, would be biased and partial as that they would only reflect the beliefs and values of judges, based on that judicial diversity is needed for the judges in Britain to make better and more critical judgments.

References.

1. NC STATE UNIVERSITY. (1997). DIVERSITY INITIATIVE. Available: http://www.ncsu.edu/univ_relations/diversity/define.htm. Last accessed 20/02/2010.

2. Jacqueline martin (2005). The English Legal System key facts. 2nd ed. Great Britain: cox and Wyman Ltd. 98.

3. Jacqueline martin and Chris Turner (2009).CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW . 5th ed. Great Britain: cox and Wyman Ltd. 28.

Bibliography.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary

http://www.ncsu.edu/univ_relations/diversity/define.htm

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/keyfacts/statistics/women.htm

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/keyfacts/statistics/ethnic.htm

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/speeches/diversity_judiciary_171007.pdf

Jacqueline martin (2005). The English Legal System key facts.

Jacqueline martin and Chris Turner(2009).Constitutional and Administrative law key facts.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8064474.stm

http://www.hrcr.org/safrica/dignity/east_african_asians_vhtm.htm

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article703008.ece

http://www.auroravoice.com/pressarticle.asp?articleid=38

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/dabbott_01.shtml

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/21237689/JUDICIAL-DIVERSITY-WHERE-INDEPENDENCE-AND-ACCOUNTABILITY-MEET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last modified: 02/02/18 Author: Law student Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Law Essay Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"If you're black, you're treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you're white."

Theresa May, 13 July 2016

Black, Asian and minority ethnic people are over-represented in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Whether black people are treated more 'harshly' than white people is a more complex topic, but there's also some evidence to suggest this happens in parts of the system.

The evidence we're looking at in this piece relates just to England and Wales, as there are separate systems and statistics in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Some of the evidence refers to all black and minority ethnic groups collectively, rather than black people alone.

It's worth bearing in mind that most people say they are 'confident' that the criminal justice system is fair, but black and mixed ethnic groups are the least likely to say so.

Black people are over-represented across different parts of the justice system

This is according to the Ministry of Justice's own statistics on race in the justice system, and has previously been acknowledged by the government.

About 3% of the population of England and Wales self-identify as having black ethnicity, according to the 2011 census. But more than 3% of people arrested, prosecuted, convicted of a crime and in prison are black. The last case presents the biggest difference in proportion: 12% of prisoners in England and Wales have black ethnicity.

These figures can only tell us so much, though. The Ministry of Justice explains that they "should not be taken as evidence of bias or as direct effects of ethnicity".

That's because these numbers alone don't tell us the reason for the over-representation. If, for example, one ethnic group only committed serious crimes and another committed only minor offences, we'd expect the first to be more likely to be in prison.

In that case the over-representation wouldn't be because the system was treating them unfairly, it would be because of their behaviour-which in turn could have other explanations.

So the challenge for researchers is to dig deeper, and several studies already have.

Some evidence of racial bias in the system

A few years ago the government published research into whether a person's ethnicity made them more likely to be sentenced to prison after being found guilty of a crime-as opposed to, say, community service. It looked at people who had committed the same type of crime in order to avoid skewing the results like in the example discussed above.

The study found there was a small but significant bias against black and minority ethnic people. It concluded:

"Black and minority ethnic offenders (particularly male offenders) were more likely to be sentenced to prison than White offenders (particularly White female offenders), under similar criminal circumstances."

This still isn't perfect proof. For instance, it can't account for specific case-by-case circumstances that justify different sentences- what are called 'aggravating' and 'mitigating' factors.

Looking at how the police operate is also an important part of the equation, according to Patrick Williams, a lecturer in criminology at Manchester Metropolitan University.

We know, for instance, that black people are four and a half times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than white people, compared to their shares of the population. Other non-white ethnic groups are also more likely, to smaller extents.

Mr Williams also says that in certain cases, black people are much more likely to be charged than cautioned for the same offence. Research has found that for cocaine possession, 78% of black people are charged rather than cautioned, compared to 44% of white people.

More evidence is on the way

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister asked David Lammy MP to lead a review into possible racial bias in the criminal justice system, which is expected to be published in 2017.

So there's good reason to expect the picture to be much clearer then. But there are some concerns about the evidence that review will be considering.

Earlier this year the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association expressed concerns that while the review was welcome, it needed to look at the criminal justice process as a whole rather than focusing on just certain parts.

For example, if black people are more likely to be prosecuted than white people, that could be because a disproportionate number of black people are being arrested in the first place.

The government's call for evidence on the review has now closed.

Isn't it nice to have the whole picture?

We rely on your donations to continue and grow our factchecking efforts - to help us maintain our independence we need 1000 donors to give £10 a month. We are currently at 502 - please help Full Fact grow.

By Joseph O'Leary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"If you're black, you're treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you're white." Theresa May, 13 July 2016 Black, Asian and minority ethnic people are over-represented in the criminal justice system in England and Wales.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ethnic minorities are heavily over-represented at all stages of the criminal justice system. We have to look at the wider structure of inequality to understand why, argues Stephanie Wallace.
Filed Under: By Stephanie Wallace All posts, Ethnicity Posted:

Two dominant explanations generally account for the over representation of ethnic minority groups in the criminal justice system; ethnic minorities commit more crime and institutionalised racism. The first argument is that ethnic minority people commit more crime and are therefore more likely to end up in the criminal justice system. This position suggests that 'cultural deficits' within certain ethnic minority communities are responsible for higher crime rates.

In a recent article in the Sunday Times, Trevor Philips argued that these 'criminogenic cultures' need to be understood so that they can be stopped from happening. However, he has received criticism for failing to acknowledge that the disproportionate numbers of ethnic minorities in the criminal justice system may be borne out of institutional racism at all stages.

Therefore an alternative explanation for the over-representation of ethnic minority people in the criminal justice system is that the system is institutionally racist. Many argue that various practices, policies, procedures and operations within the criminal justice system reinforce racial prejudice. Over policing and the use of stop and searches is often cited as just one example of institutionalised racism, in which Black and Asian men are far more likely to be stopped and searched and arrested compared to White men.

In England and Wales, ethnic minorities are over represented at all stages of the criminal justice system compared with their representation in the population aged over 10 years - the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales. Figure 1 shows the relative rates of representation at different stages of the criminal justice system compared to the representation in the population for each ethnic group. The axis, 100%, would be the level at which the rate was proportionate to population size, above that indicates a higher risk, below that a lower risk. The figure indicates the substantially greater risk for those in the Black group, with a higher risk also present for those in the Asian and Mixed groups.

As another example, Figure 2 shows the proportion of those found guilty of an indictable offence and who are then sentenced to custody. Figure 3 shows the average custodial length of those sentenced for an indictable offence. In each case ethnic minority offenders receive harsher treatment than White offenders, with the exception of duration and those in the Chinese and other group, who have a similar length to those in the White group.

However, we must treat these figures with caution. Firstly, government statistics do not take into account the type of offence the offender was sentenced for. Secondly, they do not take into consideration the culpability and harm caused by the offender, which affects the seriousness of the offence. Additionally, they do not account for prior convictions which are treated as cumulative aggravating factors; or the offence plea. Such factors increase the severity of the offence, which ultimately affects whether an offender receives a custodial sentence, as well as the length of the custodial sentence.

Research has shown that ethnic minority offenders are more likely to plead not guilty compared to White offenders. This has implications for the sentencing figures and could offer some explanation for their over-representation in the prison population. It means that if found guilty, the offender will not benefit from the discount awarded to those offenders who plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity (33% reduction in sentence); plead guilty during police questioning (25% reduction in sentence); or plead guilty on the day of their trial (10% reduction in sentence). As a result of this, ethnic minority offenders are also more likely to face a jury verdict in the Crown Court and if found guilty are more likely to receive a severe sentence.

Indeed, even prior to sentencing, ethnic minority people are over-represented in the proportion of those arrested and those who were stopped and searched under Section One of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 - far more than their representation in the population.

A third explanation considers the effects of deprivation and inequality, and suggests that to understand the over-representation of ethnic minorities in the criminal justice system we also need to consider the broader inequalities in society. This explanation adds nuance to the notion of institutional racism, by showing that we must also consider inequalities in the wider social and economic structures.

To understand the over-representation of ethnic minorities in the criminal justice system we have to look further, at the wider inequalities currently faced by many ethnic minorities. Inequalities in education, employment, and housing tenure - and the fact that ethnic minorities are more likely to live in deprived areas compared to the White population - reinforce the socially disadvantaged positions of many groups.

The compounding inequalities in education, employment and in where you live can make you more likely to come to the attention of the criminal justice system in the first place - for example, being excluded from school, or being unemployed and/or being present in deprived neighbourhoods. Furthermore, research has also highlighted the links between deprivation, being excluded from school and entering into the criminal justice system.

I would argue that rather than trying to understand so-called 'criminogenic cultures', we need to focus our attention on addressing the existing inequalities that disproportionately affect ethnic minority groups. Only then can we begin to understand how the myriad of inequalities faced by some ethnic minority groups impact on their representation in the criminal justice system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inequality in the criminal justice system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ethnic minorities are heavily over-represented at all stages of the criminal justice system. We have to look at the wider structure of inequality to understand why, argues Stephanie Wallace. Filed Under: By Stephanie Wallace All posts, Ethnicity Posted: Two dominant explanations generally account for the over representation of ethnic minority groups in the criminal justice system; ethnic minorities commit more crime and institutionalised racism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
site: gov.uk "ethnicity "criminal justice system" - Google Search

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Aug 3, 2017 ... Therefore we are unable to provide an ethnic breakdown of the offenders associated with the crimes covered by our report 'Crime in England and Wales: year ending March 2017'. Statistics on offenders are published by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). Their 'Race and the Criminal Justice System' reports are ...

# data[].attributes.body
Statistics for crime

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UK's largest independent producer of official statistics and the recognised national statistical institute of the UK.