Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many substantive complaints of unfairness in the making of appointments from the Judicial Appointments Commission have been upheld by the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman in the latest period for which figures are available; and what remedy was offered and provided in each such case.

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 enables the Judicial Appointments & Conduct Ombudsman to consider complaints from applicants for judicial office who claim to have been adversely affected, as a candidate for selection or as someone selected for judicial office, by maladministration on the part of the Judicial Appointments Commission.

A finding that a candidate was adversely affected by maladministration does not necessarily mean that their application was treated unfairly. The Ombudsman partially upheld one complaint during 2019/20, the latest period for which figures are available. This was on account of inadequacies in communications with the complainant. The Ombudsman’s 2019/20 Annual Report makes it clear that the Ombudsman had not found maladministration in the handling of the application in question. The Ombudsman did not make any substantive findings of unfairness by the Judicial Appointments Commission. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/902198/jaco-annual-report-2019-20.pdf