Judges Service in Westminster Abbey A colleague and I have written to the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice this week asking for the annual judges' service at Westminster Abbey on 1 October to cease. The gist of the issue is covered in today's Guardian, and Joshua Rozenberg has commented favourably: Letter to justice minister calls for separation of C of E from judicial affairs | Politics | The Guardian The judges' annual church service is expensive and inappropriate | Joshua Rozenberg | Law | theguardian.com
Link to Law Society Gazette piece: Judges' religious service 'undermines public confidence' | News | Law Society Gazette
Its old ceremonies like this that set us apart from the rest of the world. Expensive or not who cares, they will only give the money saved to a Foreign country
Thank you Peter for your efforts in working towards making our world a better place. Much appreciated by me.
Can you also mention the idea of having judges spend three months of the year living in the real world - I think it would do 'em good! And well played, by the way. I think you were right to flag this up for Their Lordships.
Judges do actually live in homes, buy cars, bring up kids, get parking tickets, get divorced, commute to work, pay bills ... just like everybody else. They don't really live on Mount Olympus. For me the underlying issue is about judges' impartiality. There is a lot of detailed guidance so judges can avoid bias as regards political activities, commercial enterprises, media work, etc etc but a gaping black hole when it comes to religious bias. I am not saying judges actually show bias (not many anyway), just that an appearance of bias is created needlessly. Hence my initiative to try and get this addressed at the highest level.
You seriously expect me to believe that judges aren't grown hydroponically and then cultivated in nurseries? There's one thing judges don't seem to do, though - they don't get out of prison. Agreed. Being seen to be independent is every bit as important as actually being independent, where public confidence is concerned. Public confidence in the legal system is every bit as important as any other public confidence, be it political, fiscal or any other social issue.
Good luck Pete - not sure I'd go as far as a JR, but I doubt you'd be surprised to hear I'm sympathetic. By all means have an opening of the legal year ceremony, the dressing up, pomp and circumstance, but it should be at the RCJ or Supreme Court and not in the slightest bit religious.
Reply received from the Crown Office, full of rather bland reassurance and not making any concessions, but not providing any arguments against our points. So far, much as expected. Round Two is to seek various kinds of information about the issue under the Freedom of Information Act. Another strand is contacting the Lord Chief Justice to ask for the Guide to Judicial Conduct to be revised so as to deal with religious issues as it does with political issues. Letters will be going off next week. http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Guidance/judicial_conduct_2013.pdf
The latest round in this campaign is sending a series of letters to the Crown Office, the Lord Chief Justice, the Judicial Appointments Commission, and the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, together sending with a Press Release outlining the issues to press and broadcast media. We now wait to see what happens. If anyone is interested, the documents are posted as pdf files here: The Church of England and the Judiciary | Lawyers' Secular Society
I see where you are going with this Pete, but does it really matter? I mean, it's just a bit of show isn't it? I rather like all this pomp and ceremony, it sets us apart from all the other cave dwellers in Europe.
I think it does matter. I want the judiciary to be non-compromised by adherence to particular political or religious views, but to be neutral. Political - pretty good now; religious - still some way to go. We can still have the pomp and ceremony, but leave out the god stuff. I am doing what I can as a citizen to nudge events in that direction. I wonder how long it will take to get there: one year, two years, or five years? My guess is maybe two years campaigning, but I may be wrong.
Bring back the Druids, that's what I say. In my court appearances I've never taken the bible oath, nor as a soldier back in the day, even as a cub/scout I asked not to. Met with fairly mild tutting and shanking of head throughout all these situations. Didn't go to normal church services in the army. Now that caused problems; my reward was doing spud bashing till they marched back to camp from the church. ALL my mates weren't at all religious and some were to put it politely - animals - when out of uniform. I didn't jump up or down but just calmly pointed out that I was an atheist and didn't want to go to church as it was not something I believed in(sic)and felt a bit of a hypocrite if I did go. Also took a lot of effort to get records to put atheist on my paperwork instead of their default of N.D. (no denomination). My parents left it up to me to decide what I wanted to do re a belief system or not. No pressure either way. Sweet. :biggrin:
I see what you're saying Pete, and can see you're serious about it. I still like the pomp though, so maybe if they still donned all the regalia but moved from a different starting point. How about staggering back in full battle-cry from the Morpeth Arms..?
I agree that it is a good thing for members of the press and public (and tourists) to be able to see all the senior judges in full pomp and regalia processing in the street, at least once a year. They could still attend the Lord Chancellor's Breakfast in Westminster Hall on 1 October in robes and wigs, just as they do now, but omit the prior religious services in Westminster Abbey and Westminster Cathedral. That is the end point I am aiming at.
