Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Levitt on 30 June (HL993), what discussions they have had with the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office about (1) the Office's satisfaction that Immigration and Asylum tribunal judges are recusing themselves appropriately in cases where there is a potential conflict of interest, and (2) whether the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office has sufficient information about the interests of those judges that might present conflicts of interest in litigation.

The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) supports the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice in their joint responsibility for judicial discipline. It considers complaints about a judge’s personal conduct in line with statutory regulations, rules and related guidance. The JCIO does not have a role in monitoring or investigating judges’ conduct unless a complaint is made or referred to it. In terms of recusal, it can only consider these if the appeal court has criticised a judge for failure to declare a potential conflict of interest so serious as to raise a question of judicial misconduct.

The Guide to Judicial Conduct contains a core set of principles designed to support all judicial office holders’ conduct and decision-making, including judges in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal. The Guide states that: “Judicial office holders must recuse themselves from any case where a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that they would be biased.” Responsibility for maintaining and upholding these standards rests with the independent judiciary. It would be inappropriate for the Government to discuss with JCIO what information they should consider in conduct cases.