JCIO 75/24
Date: 26 November 2024
A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office Said:
Mr Justice Keehan, with the Lord Chancellor’s agreement, has issued Ms Elizabeth Slamer JP with formal advice for misconduct.
Facts
The expedited process in the Judicial Conduct Magistrates Rules 2023 enables the JCIO to advise the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice that a magistrate should be issued with formal advice or a formal warning where—
(a) there is no dispute as to the facts set out in the complaint;
(b) the alleged facts relate to conduct which the JCIO considers that the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice would be very likely to decide amounted to misconduct; and
(c) the JCIO considers that the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice would be very likely to decide that formal advice or a formal warning was the appropriate disciplinary sanction.
The declaration and undertaking signed by all magistrates on their appointment states that they will agree to be circumspect in their conduct and maintain the good reputation of the magistracy at all times, in their private, working, and public lives. They should avoid situations which might reasonably reduce the respect for judicial office or which might cast doubt upon their judicial impartiality. This includes avoiding use of the ‘JP’ status in ways that could be perceived as trying to gain influence.
A complaint was made to the Midlands Region Conduct Advisory Committee after a letter entitled ‘Single parenthood’ was published in The Times on 26 July 2024. The letter, written by Ms Slamer, included her status as a family court JP. Ms Slamer’s letter, sent in response to a letter from a different author about the failure of the Child Support Agency, remarked on the “relentless rise in the acceptability of” absent fathers than of “single mothers”.
Elizabeth Slamer’s representations
Ms Slamer accepted full responsibility for her actions and admitted that she had included her judicial status in the letter to add weight to her argument and highlight her experience. She stated that she had reacted in the moment to a perceived unfairness in the original author’s comments, who she considered had unfairly identified single mothers as the sole reason for the problem of demands on benefits and housing. Ms Slamer accepted that she had failed to consider the lack of impartiality that this could indicate.
Decision
Mr Justice Keehan, on behalf of the Lady Chief Justice, and the Lord Chancellor agreed with advice from the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office. Ms Slamer should have known that by using her JP status to add weight to a public debate, she risked damage to the public’s view of her own impartiality and that of the wider magistracy. In agreeing to issue Ms Slamer with formal advice, they took into consideration that she had taken full responsibility for her actions, had apologised and given an assurance that she would not repeat the behaviour again.
Media queries in relation to the JCIO should be made in the first instance to the Judicial Press Office - telephone 020 7073 4852 or via email - press.enquiries@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk
Sanctions for misconduct by judicial office-holders are set out in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. They are, in order of severity: formal advice, formal warning, reprimand and removal from office.
For more information about the Office, including details on how to make a complaint against a judicial office holder, you can visit the JCIO website at: Judicial Conduct Investigations website