JCIO 100/25

   

A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said:

The Lord Chancellor, with the Lady Chief Justice’s agreement, has removed Mr Simon Fawthrop JP, of the South London Local Justice Area, from office for misconduct.

Facts

The Guide to Judicial Conduct states that judicial office-holders should not comment publicly on the merits of individual cases. The guidance also makes clear that, if judicial office-holders are asked to speak publicly about matters relating to other roles they hold, they should ensure they are not described by their judicial role and should take care not to give the impression that they are commenting in a judicial capacity. The Guide also states that judicial office-holders should not act in a way, even in their private life, which could reduce respect for judicial office or cast doubt on their independence, impartiality or integrity.

Magistrates also sign a declaration and undertaking which requires them to notify their bench chair immediately of any civil or criminal proceedings in which they become involved in “in any capacity.”

A complaint was made to the London Conduct Advisory Committee alleging that Mr Fawthrop publicly criticised a court judgment and the criminal justice system and referred to his status as a magistrate while acting as spokesperson for a group of defendants. It was also alleged that Mr Fawthrop had failed to notify his bench chair of his involvement in acting as a spokesperson for the group.

Mr Fawthrop’s representations

Mr Fawthrop admitted to making public comments on the case but maintained that the views expressed were not his own and that he had not been directly involved in the case. He argued that his involvement as a spokesperson was in his capacity as a councillor and not as a magistrate. He accepted that he had referred to his judicial status during one statement and apologised, saying it was unintentional. Mr Fawthrop described the complaint against him as politically motivated.

Nominated committee member’s findings

Following an investigation carried out under the Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2023, a nominated committee member concluded that Mr Fawthrop’s actions amounted to gross misconduct and recommended that Mr Fawthrop be removed from office. Mr Fawthrop subsequently exercised his right to have a disciplinary panel consider the complaint.

Disciplinary Panel’s findings

The disciplinary panel found that Mr Fawthrop’s conduct had the cumulative effect of undermining public confidence in the judiciary and the criminal justice system. His comments, which included criticism of the trial judge’s impartiality and integrity, were considered inappropriate for a serving magistrate.

The panel noted that Mr Fawthrop had failed to notify his bench chair of his involvement in the case. They found that his justification – that he was acting solely in his capacity as a councillor – demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the obligations of judicial office. The panel also expressed concern that Mr Fawthrop continued to minimise the seriousness of his actions and failed to fully acknowledge the risk of damage to the magistracy and the criminal justice system.

Decision

The Lady Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor agreed with the disciplinary panel’s finding of gross misconduct and recommendation to remove Mr Fawthrop from office. 
 

Notes for Editors

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