Transcript

KAREN SHUMAN:

My name is Karen Schumann. I'm a chancery master. I was a barrister in independent practise. And unusually, because most people are a part-time judge before they take up a full-time appointment, I went straight from full-time barristering to full-time judging.

VICTORIA MCCLOUD:

My name's Victoria McLeod, and I'm currently a Queen's Bench master in the high court in London. I began life after school studying psychology, and I did research after university in how the human brain perceives things in three dimensions. So I did a doctorate in psychology.

But I always wanted to ultimately end up being a lawyer. So I qualified as a barrister, and I practised as a barrister in general common law for several years, from I think 1995 till 2010, when I was lucky enough to be appointed as a full-time judge in the Queen's Bench division in the high court.

REHANA POPAL:

My name is Rehana Popal. I'm a barrister. I practise at 33 Bedford Row Chambers. My practise is quite wide ranging, but it predominantly encompasses public law, and within that, immigration asylum, human rights.

It came as quite a surprise to me when I qualified, to find out that I was the first-ever Afghan female to qualify. It wasn't something that I set out to do. It just happened. That wasn't the goal or the objective.

Being in my position, I think, A: I realise how much more we have to do for inclusion and diversity, just generally along the bar. But also, I have faced other challenges in my day-to-day, whether or not that's discrimination from a client because they want, for example, a white male barrister.

KAREN SHUMAN:

In terms of my experiences as a woman barrister, I felt that entering the legal profession was very supportive, actually. Inevitably, many of the people, the experienced people I met were men. And they were incredibly supportive for me. So I had a really positive start to practise. So as a woman, I didn't see any of the problems that I am aware do happen in practise.

I say that because I chair the Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion Committee at Lincoln's Inn. So I do hear horror stories from other women. I would say that my experiences changed when I was pregnant with my first child. The experiences being pregnant as a woman barrister, I think, were regrettable with some of the support staff, because they made judgments about me. And they were matters for me or matters for my husband and I and not for clerks to make decisions on my behalf.

And so that was the first time that I really experienced or obviously experienced sexism in practise. I certainly have never experienced it from any judge or from any colleague.

VICTORIA MCCLOUD:

I'm kind of interesting in that I wasn't always a woman barrister, in the sense that I started my career, as far as everyone else was concerned, a male barrister and actually spent a couple of years before transitioning. So I spent most of my life, as far as the world was concerned, as a woman barrister. But actually very, very early on, I wasn't. So I've had the interesting experience of at least appearing to be both at various times.

Experience of, certainly as a woman barrister, certainly occasions-- this is way back when. I hope it's changed. I don't know if it has. I've haven't been a woman barrister for years. I've been a judge.

But certainly sometimes not really being heard. I mean, sometimes I would say something, and it was as if I haven't said it, which could be frustrating. But actually, mostly, I think because the bar is largely self-employed, and certainly in my day, it was virtually all self-employed, I think there is more opportunity to sort of make your own way.

REHANA POPAL:

Being dyslexic, it's been incredibly challenging at times. It was very challenging during universities. So throughout studying my undergrad, postgraduate, and particularly bar school, the BPTC, the Bar Professional Training Course, at that time what it was when I was studying, isn't set up for those who are dyslexic.

And there's a really big misconception about dyslexia. People forget that it's not the case of you're not clever enough, or you're not bright, or anything of that nature. It's rather the way you think is slightly different. Now, I believe, and in my practise, I believe that's given me a strategic advantage. I'm able to look at things from a wholly different angle that actually the vast majority of people who aren't dyslexic don't necessarily see.

VICTORIA MCCLOUD:

Anyone who's got the privilege of making decisions is bound to be disliked. Like all judges, one gets abuse. One gets emails. One gets social media stuff, even though I'm not active in social media. But there's stuff out there. All judges get that. Women judges get it, I think, more. And if you happen to be trans and a woman judge, you get the full set.

KAREN SHUMAN:

In terms of whether the profession is changing as a result of increasing attention to diversity, yes, because there is more equality in terms of, if one just looks at gender alone, there is more equality with people entering the profession. But I don't think that the profession is changing fast enough thereafter. There are still barriers, particularly for women and from anyone from a minority ethnic background, to not only getting a foot on the career ladder at the bar but having a free choice on the subject areas they practise in. And then a particular problem is retention. And all of that is an issue because in the main, but not wholly, the judiciary is drawn from the bar.

REHANA POPAL:

Though it takes years for a person to become a senior member of the bar, so going from a junior barrister to when you take silk, maybe 15, 20 years, to when you're called to the bench, maybe 10 years thereafter, that progress takes time. And it's important that we recruit and retain people that are reflective of the community and society that it represents. Because when they don't represent the community and society, there's a sense of disjointedness, particularly when it had comes to how people feel about the profession.

VICTORIA MCCLOUD:

Diversity's increasing gradually. I mean the profession is obviously a big word. Depends on which bit of profession you're talking about. So for example, the Institute of Paralegals is the most diverse branch of the legal profession. Solicitors, very diverse. The bar, I think, less, and the judiciary even less. And the senior judiciary, still less again.

So for example, and by Jove, don't they know it, many judges now know a trans judge, which they might not have known otherwise. So they hopefully will find it harder, and I'm sure they don't, to harbour certain sorts of prejudice that might have been there in ignorance of actually knowing someone. And that, I think, must go for all sorts of other groups, too. It can blow stereotypes.

KAREN SHUMAN:

Suppose I would make three points in relation to why it is important. One, I firmly believe that the legal profession should reflect society. Secondly, you should bring in people with different perspectives and backgrounds. And thirdly, you should open up the experiences that that cohort of people have. Because ultimately, it makes us a better decision maker.

And that doesn't just mean a judge. It means a lawyer acting on a case. And I think that if you have a more diverse and inclusive legal profession, then you have a greater legitimation for that legal profession. You have more public confidence. Because otherwise, you risk alienation.

So I think it is vital in any modern society that you have as diverse a legal profession as possible. And diversity does not mean that you water down the qualities and values of that legal profession. It only adds to them.