Damian Green is
proposing that jurors should be able to serve up to the age of 75 and there is
discussion within the Magistrates` Association whether or not there is a sign
at the Justice Ministry of increasing the compulsory retirement age for
magistrates from the current age of 70 to that self same 75. Currently 44% of J.P.s are aged under 60 and
only 16% are under 50 years of age. The
reasons for this profile are very simple; affordability. Disregarding the current economic situation
the sacrifices required in time and money to do the job are just too onerous
for those in the younger age groups whose family and career requirements must
be a priority. There are still some
colleagues who think we should be paid but that is a certain non starter and as
far as age is concerned the Minister can rattle on all he wants about the
magistracy reflecting the diversity of a local population but he will find it
all but impossible to persuade younger aspirants to apply especially with
increasing numbers of employers refusing to grant additional days off even for current magistrates to be available
for sittings and training.
With the number
of Justices of the Peace set to decline significantly owing to current and
future (as yet unspecified) government plans natural wastage of those 13,000
over 60s will ensure that the remaining rump will perform the limited duties that will be required of them. By their being relatively new to the Bench
they will have no knowledge of the days
now but a memory when magistrates really did have a major part in the running
of the magistrates` courts. They will
calmly and dutifully perform whatever tasks are allotted to them by Her
Majesty`s Courts and Tribunal Service however distant from the court
environment these tasks are performed and however much they are treated by said
HMCTS merely as unpaid employees to be told how, why, when or where.
Before the coming into force of the Justices of the Peace Act 1968, magistrates retired at the age of 75. The Act reduced this to 70 70. It took three or four years to implement this fully.
ReplyDeleteHow interesting; there are plenty of magistrates who can easily sit after age 70, and those who aren't suitable would be weeded out by the appraisal process.
ReplyDeleteIt seems illogical to allow jurors to go on to 75, but not JPs, since the roles are not dissimilar, yet jurors have no training or experience.
However, since when did logic form part of the MoJ brief.
Perhaps "would be weeded out" should read "should be weeded out". In my 20 years experience including as Bench chairman and appraiser, I have long felt that the appraisal system was not sufficiently robust but in latter years, as our role declined, I felt that it was probably sufficient for our hugely diminished role and restricted discretion.
ReplyDelete