Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council ... - Consultation Hub

and the virtuous and cost reducing cycle which comes from feedback and learning. Cost
The introduction of judicial nomenclature and the cultural attitudes of the judiciary into
Service this was not their fault. They were simply overwhelmed by the wave of
The AJTC, seeing the progress that was being made, gritted its collective teeth and
tribunal estate and with the Ministry of Justice estate more widely. An expensive mistake
through the system, at a cost which incidentally would have paid for the AJTC’s modest
opportunity to return to a more user focused line of best fit.
savings have also not been as rapid as hoped for, particularly in the rationalisation of the
expenditure levels for some years to come. From a user point of view, the promised
sought to remain supportive in the expectation that at some point there would be an
necessary cost reduction which is sweeping across the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
will be opportunities to renew their introduction in future, In fairness to the Tribunals
multi purpose hearing centres never materialized after the first, although hopefully there
was also made in attempting to rationalize technology to manage the flow of cases
informality and drive tribunal justice further from its linkages with both service provision
which the tribunal chairs (now judges) are being absorbed will over time militate against
the Tribunals Service, ab’e to create some economies of scale but perhaps more
importantly from the viewpoint of fairness, to begin to converge a wide variety of
variety of administrative back offices into a more coherent chamber system but there is
the reforms have not however been without penalty.
much more to do. These changes which might be regarded as the tangible benefits of
approach. It was done very quickly, as was the relatively seamless transition from a
procedural rules from many jurisdictional areas into a more coherent and consistent
An important step along the journey to a more coherent system of AJ was the creation of
and coherenhly across all its activities —
values, such is the competitiveness and fragmentation which is driven by national
in
my jargon to adopt corporate standards and
The second is because no department of government has ever been able to persuade
central government (or for that matter local government) of the need to act consistently
The first is simply because the Ministry of Justice is oniy one department of government.
not only to be fair and impartial but be seen to be fair and impartial. Advocacy for such
politics.
a principle cannot be maintained by any one department of government for two reasons.
A fundamental feature of AJ since Franks and since reinforced by Leggatt is the need
authority and continuity of its membership and secretariat and at very low cost.
based on fundamental principles which have been maintained over decades through the
involved the persistent application of influence and expertise at a detailed level, often
independent voice which could champion informality, fair treatment, actual and
advocate for fair treatment. Much of its work has been ‘behind the scenes and has
to stand at least partially outside central and local government and provide an
Franks demonstrated the need for a body, first the Council on Tribunals, now the AJTC
approach preserved insight and access to government departments which might not
procedural fairness and support for users short of campaigning. A non campaigning
otherwise have been forthcoming but arguably also weakened the AJTC’s profile as an
my view to unlearn the fragile lessons of Franks learned over more than half a century.
AJTC but also the continued absorption of tribunal justice into the court system seek in
the landscape has never been greater. Current proposals, not just for abolition of the
duplication. Against this background, the need for a body to exercise some oversight of