Over the past few years, there has been extreme emphasis on the topic of judicial diversity and positive discrimination. Traditionally, the profession of elite judges tends to be dominated by white men, primarily from privileged social backgrounds. The diversity debate has mainly been focused upon the arrangement of the higher courts in the English Legal System. Currently there are twelve Justices of the Supreme Court, one of which is a woman. This highlights the fact that “there is a diversity shortfall – especially at the top”, as quoted by Lord Nueberger, President of the Supreme Court. This is thought to have affected the diversity of the judiciary. In the higher judiciary, women account for 14%, whilst 3% are from a black or minority ethnic …show more content…
In 2012, the Lords Constitution Committee deemed that “to increase public trust and confidence in the judiciary, there is a need to increase judicial diversity”. So in order to do so, judicial diversity should begin from the upper reaches and slowly the lower reaches will follow, therefore judicial diversity should increase. Lord Neuberger stated that “the ethnic minority representation among the senior judiciary is very low”. This is evident as current statistics shows that female judges and BME judges are predominantly concentrated in the lower echelons of the judiciary. The number of both women and BME judges starts to depreciate as you move up the judicial hierarchy. It has become quite difficult to increase judicial diversity amongst the upper benches of the legal profession, as judges have security of tenure. Hence, reforming judicial appointments will allow the judiciary to become more diverse. Positive discrimination is the most effective, yet undesirable route that is likely to increase judicial diversity significantly. As Lord Sumption declared, “because we are not prepared to recognise that selection on merit is only compatible with a move to a diverse bench over a considerable period of time, we have never thought seriously enough about the choice to be made between them”. In addition to this, positive discrimination would deter the best candidates from applying. Lady Hale opposed Lord Sumption’s claim that positive discrimination would “dilute the quality of the bench”, and said “diverse courts are better courts”. Clearly, selection on merit alone is essential to the judiciary’s legitimacy, yet “what remains entirely unclear is whether the public would still take this view if they appreciated that faster progress towards a diverse judiciary would require the partial
Legal system is a comprehensive term that is used to confirm the existence of the law; it also explains the law-making process and how this is enforced on everyone. The Australian legal system regulates all level of governments, organisations, and all people whether they are Australian born or have migrated here, and they must obey Australia’s regulations. The legal system here was developed from the United Kingdom’s legal system, as Australia was a colony of the British. At a glance, the British government granted restricted rights to their colonies, including Australia to set local government system. This was intended to developed laws in local area, also to deal with specific situation at that time. As a result, the legal system in each of the colonies started to develop separately. According to Carvan J (2010) the Australian law is adopted from several sources, including the rules of equity, parliamentary laws, delegated legislations, judge-made laws, and international laws. (Austrlian Legal System, 2007)
In many nation states, it is noticed that there is a disproportionate number of black people especially those youngsters going through the criminal justice system. The overrepresentation is illustrated by related data released by the U.S. Department of Justice and the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. In America, almost 3500 per 100,000 residents of the black male were sent to jail in 2013 which was over seven times more than the ratio their white counterpart had and in England and Wales, 8.5% of young black people aged between 10-17 were arrested during the same period .This essay aims to explore the reasons behind the ethnic overrepresentation in the criminal justice system and believes that the higher rate of offending for some race groups and the existence of systematic racist which partially stems from the contemporary media distortion are attributive to the overrepresentation.
Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then separating them into smaller groups to be seated in the jury box. The judge and or attorneys ask questions with intent to determine if any juror is biased or cannot deal with the issues fairly. The question process is referred to as voir dire, a French word meaning, “to see to speak”. During voir dire, attorneys have the right to excuse a juror in peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are based on the potential juror admitting bias, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, personal knowledge of the facts, or the attorney believing he/she might not be impartial. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky, James Batson, a black man, was indicted for second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the selection of the jury the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike out all of the four black potential jurors, leaving an all white jury. Batson’s attorney moved to discharge the venire, the list from which jurors may be selected, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges violated his client’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury derived from a “cross-section of the community”(People v. Wheeler, 583 P.3d 748 [Calif. 1978]). The circuit court ruled in favor of the prosecutor and convicted Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Our book opens us up to the world of diversity and inequality in the United States. It presses on issues about groups that hold superiority towards inferior groups for multiple reasons. In “Imagine our country” our book blatantly calls out America’s problems and how we in some cases are only increasing the chances of them continuing. It helps define the differences between racism and discrimination, which I never thought about enough to distinguish before taking this class. These chapters also offer hope and ways to combat these differences, because while we may be stuck in a social loop-hole there are available ways to challenge these and make society aware of changes and in act upon them!
Sentencing disparity refers to the differences in sentences that are passed down in the same instances. This can happen on a variety of fronts. It can occur with judges, in different states, states v. federal, different prosecutors, among different victims, etc. (Criminal – Sentencing…2017 p.4) A more specific definition from USLegal.com states that, “Sentence disparity refers to an inequality in criminal sentencing which is the result of unfair or unexplained causes, rather than a legitimate use of discretion in the application of the law.”. There are a variety of ways that sentencing disparity affects the justice system. There are three factors that disparity looms around; they are gender disparity, racial disparity, and age disparity. (4
The American Government was designed to represent the people who are voting members of society. When analyzing the makeup of government, one could find that women have become an integral part to American politics. With the rise of female politicians, minority female political leaders still tend to come in low numbers. One could argue that the inclusion of minority females in politics is solely up to women. The responsibility of representing the American population as a whole should not be solely placed on one designated person or group but rather a collective effort of all. Minority females are typically seen at the negative end of statistics rather it is in education, health care, employment and the economy.
The court system of any country is a fundamental aspect of the society. In this respect, there are no public institutions in Canada which are subject to public scrutiny like the court system. People expectations of how they are treated by others are guided by laws made by various levels of institutions of justice. The Canadian judicial system, particularly, has undergone major developments and challenges as well. This paper explores three published articles that report on the problem of patronage appointments what lies behind the confidence in the justice system and the relevance of gender and gender equality in the legal profession.
The jury system has evolved from a representation of all white men to both men and women from very diverse backgrounds. This is important if one is going to be tried in his/her community of peers.
The US Justice Department statistics 2003 and onwards demonstrates significant disproportion in the incarceration rate of minority African American and Hispanic men between the ages of 25 and 29 years as compared to the rate associated with White men of the same age. Bell (2007), proposes that as minority groups grow in numbers within the dominant group they will experience greater equality. However, rate of incarceration among minority males remains alarmingly high and as compared to their White counterparts. As with health care there are racial disparities that will influence outcomes when an individual is brought before the criminal courts. Additionally, there is significant correlation between a person’s level of education and the likelihood of his involvement in criminal activities. Studies and statistics have shown that among male high school dropouts there is high incidence of unemployment, low income and rate of illicit drug use as compared to men with degrees from four year colleges. Further to this, although the rate of school dropout and even arrest is not significantly different across the race lines, literature alludes that African American men have a higher rate of conviction for the same crime committed.
When deciding the sentences and consequences of the person, the judge tends to be harder on male defendants in criminal matters. “I found that blacks, males, and offenders with low levels of education and income receive substantially longer sentences” (Mustard 5). Gender bias is considered stereotypical attitudes about the roles of men and women and misconceptions about the social and economic realities faced by both sexes. Respect is enhanced for the court and the law and increases the civility when the courtroom has no gender bias present. A judge is not supposed to make his or her decisions based on sex. In order to examine the gender bias that took place in the court system, a task force was created. The first gender bias
Ragers, Simon. / The Guardian (2012) White and Male: diversity and the judiciary. Available from: //www. Theguardian.com/news/databblog/2012/mar/28/judges-ethnic-sex-diversity-judiciary.
The United States criminal justice system is an ever-changing system that is based on the opinions and ideas of the public. Many of the policies today were established in direct response to polarizing events and generational shifts in ideology. In order to maintain public safety and punish those who break these laws, law enforcement officers arrest offenders and a judge or a group of the law offender’s peers judge their innocence. If found guilty, these individuals are sentenced for a predetermined amount of time in prison and are eventually, evaluated for early release through probation. While on probation, the individual is reintegrated into their community, with restrict limitations that are established for safety. In theory, this system
make police work more effective and efficient. Hanser and Gomila (2015) noted, “The criminal justice system does not operate in a social vacuum; rather, it is directly impacted by this sense of rapid and continual cultural change” (p. 7). In light of globalization, law enforcement organizations must change the way it operates in a world where criminal activities and terrorism are more geographically diverse and sophisticated.
It is widely acknowledged that the judiciary within England and Wales is not representative of the wider society. The composition of the judiciary is regularly subject to criticism on its apparent homogenous identity’ being largely comprised of elderly, white male barristers educated at Oxford or Cambridge. This ethos has prevented diversity within the judiciary, particularly the upper echelons of the judiciary. Academics such as John Griffith have suggested that the narrow range of the judiciary threatens to undermine public confidence in the judicial system. Similarly, Baroness Hale argues that a representative judiciary is paramount for directives associated with the promotion of equal opportunities and strengthening of judicial legitimacy. The government has attempted to combat these issues with statutory and procedural changes to the Courts and Legal Service Act 1990, the Courts Act 2003, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, and the Judicial Appointments Committee. However, the government’s reforms have made little impact on the demographic profile of the judiciary, as the cornerstone of all judicial appointments is merit. Until diversity can break into the judiciary, particularly the upper echelons of the judiciary there will continue to be a lingering threat to the publics confidence of the judiciary as diversification has yet to materialize.
The given statement suggests that the emphasis on judicial diversity is unnecessary since there is no guarantee that a diverse judiciary would arrive at a different decision than that of a conservative judiciary. This essay attempts to argue that although there is no evidence that a diverse bench would radically change the outcome of a given case, the quality of justice will be substantially enhanced by the inclusion of a range of perspectives from which are currently not represented by the English judiciary.