Abuse training for judges

How the judiciary are equipped to recognise the effects of coercion and trauma

Senior judges have explained for the first time how members of the judiciary are trained to deal with cases involving domestic abuse. Their training aims to ensure they can respond in a way that supports safe and effective participation by parties to court proceedings while avoiding unnecessary re-traumatisation. It’s designed to ensure that magistrates and judges are equipped to recognise how experiences of trauma can affect behaviour, memory, communication and participation.

Lady Justice King, chair of the Judicial College

The Judicial College, which was set up 15 years ago to provide judge-led training for judges, published a summary yesterday of the work it does in this area.

It says:

We recognise the importance of the judiciary receiving training in the knowledge, skills and care that cases involving domestic abuse demand and being equipped to ensure a fair process and just outcome in each case.

Domestic abuse has been, and remains, a central focus of the training programme — covering physical and sexual abuse, threatening and violent behaviour, coercion and control, economic abuse and psychological and emotional abuse.

It is a pervasive theme woven into training for all magistrates and judges in the family and criminal jurisdictions.

Lady Justice King, who chairs the Judicial College, added:

Cases involving domestic abuse demand high levels of judicial skill, sensitivity and care.

For the first time, the college is setting out how issues of domestic abuse are embedded across the training programme for all magistrates and judges in the family and criminal courts.

This includes understanding the dynamics of coercion and control, identifying the impact of bias and recognising the effects of trauma. Training equips judicial office holders to ensure safe participation for all parties and a fair process — and just outcome — in each case.

The college recognises that this type of training is potentially traumatic for both trainers and trainees.

“Given the prevalence and nature of domestic abuse,” it says, “the college endeavours to create safe environments for all those participating in, or responsible for, delivering judicial training — and to highlight the welfare resources and support services available.”

Comment

The document published yesterday by the Judicial College is part of the its declared commitment to being open and outward-facing. Effective external engagement and relationships is one of the core priorities outlined in its recent strategy paper.

The college works on behalf of the lady chief justice, senior president of tribunals and chief coroner to train some 24,000 judicial office holders. Its objectives are to deliver world-leading training, equipping members of the judiciary to carry out their roles effectively and with confidence while maintaining high standards of decision-making.

Until the 1970s, however, judges in England and Wales resented the idea that they needed to be trained at all. Indeed, some thought it positively harmful: in 1976, Lord Devlin said that the words "judicial training" occasioned alarm. That’s why the euphemism "Judicial Studies Board" was chosen when the first training body was set up in 1979.

This reticence was abandoned when the Judicial College took over in 2011. But it was a long time coming: setting up a full-time training body had been suggested by Lord Pannick KC in a book he wrote as long ago as 1987.

The judiciary has always regarded it as essential that judges are trained by other judges, either current or former. Academics — and now trauma experts — are invited to give lectures and evaluate training methods. But decisions on the areas in which judges are trained are not taken by civil servants — still less by ministers.