The Lord Chancellor's Department Just Published A Diversity Strategy. The Government's Own Guidance Says It's Unlawful.
David Lammy is the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice. He is constitutionally responsible for the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in England and Wales. On 11th June 2026 his department published its Public Appointments Diversity and Outreach Strategy. Nick Timothy MP has written to him asking him to publish the legal advice behind it. He should.
The strategy sets an expectation that at least 90 percent of campaigns achieve demonstrable diversity on sift and interview panels, with panel selection informed by the current diversity of the board and any representation gaps. A panel is considered diverse where data shows representation of more than one sex, or at least one declared ethnic minority or disabled panel member. Any exceptions require documented justification and quarterly senior oversight.
The Equality Act permits positive action only in narrow circumstances. It must address a documented disadvantage, different needs, or disproportionately low participation. The department's own figures show 57 percent of its 2024 to 2025 appointments were women. That is a majority, not underrepresentation. The 12 percent ethnic minority figure is compared against 17 percent of the economically active population, but that is not the correct benchmark. The correct benchmark is the pool of qualified candidates, not the population as a whole.
The Government's own Equalities Office guidance is explicit. Creating schemes to benefit those with a particular protected characteristic, without evidence that the group is at a disadvantage or has different needs, is listed as an example of unlawful discrimination. So is requiring places reserved for those with particular protected characteristics on interview panels. The Ministry of Justice strategy appears to do both.
This is not a new position for Lammy. In 2019 he hosted a Labour conference event with Shami Chakrabarti specifically advocating time limited quotas for judicial diversity. The Lord Chief Justice responded at the time that such quotas are not compatible with appointment on merit nor, ultimately, in sustaining public confidence in the judiciary. Lammy is now implementing from the office of Lord Chancellor a policy the most senior judge in the country said would undermine confidence in judicial independence.
The stated 2028 target is a measurable reduction in the representation gap for underrepresented groups, moving the appointee profile toward the diversity profile of the UK economically active population. That is not a description of merit based selection. It is a description of demographic engineering with a deadline.
This sits within the same DEI framework documented across British institutions this week. The Sussex Police book club on inner white supremacy. The NHS pressure not to section black patients. The Hampshire Race Action Plan. Each implements SDG 10.2 and 10.3, the United Nations Agenda 2030 commitments to inclusion and reduced inequalities of outcome, adopted by Britain in 2015 without a single vote. The Ministry of Justice strategy is that same architecture applied to the department responsible for the rule of law itself.
If the Lord Chancellor's own department believes its diversity quota is lawful, the legal advice supporting that view should be published. If no such advice exists, that is the more serious problem. Either way, the department charged with upholding the law owes the public an answer.
"Lammy is now implementing from the office of Lord Chancellor a policy the most senior judge in the country said would undermine confidence in judicial independence."
David Lammy’s new diversity plan appears to be illegal.
He should publish his legal advice.