Tribunal judge committed misconduct when standing as candidate in local election

Tribunal Judge Satvinder Juss stated that he had sat without campaigning, distributing materials, or referring to his judicial role, and that he had not used his judicial appointment as a means of pursuing personal advantage.

However, he Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) said: “While, at the relevant time, Judge Juss considered that standing as a candidate in a local election was permissible for a fee-paid judge, sitting in retirement, he subsequently accepted that his candidacy was inconsistent with the Guide to Judicial Conduct. He subsequently apologised and expressed regret.”

The JCIO launched its investigation after receiving a referral that Judge Juss had stood as a political candidate.

It noted that the Guide to Judicial Conduct provides that judicial office holders should avoid activity which could compromise, or appear to compromise, their impartiality.

“Whilst there is no general prohibition on political activity for fee-paid judicial holders, they are expected to refrain from any political activity which would conflict with their judicial role or be seen to compromise their impartiality.”

Following an investigation under the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023, a nominated judge found that while Judge Juss had not referred to his judicial status in the relevant election material, this was nonetheless readily ascertainable, particularly in the context of his public candidacy.

The nominated judge also found that in standing as a candidate in a local election, Judge Juss had breached the expectation that fee-paid judges refrain from political activity that could compromise judicial impartiality, and that this amounted to misconduct.

The Lady Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor agreed that Judge Juss’ conduct amounted to misconduct.

The JCIO said: “In light of Judge Juss’ subsequent acknowledgment of wrongdoing and remedial steps, they considered formal advice to be the appropriate and proportionate sanction.”