Minority scholars urge judges to quit ¡®exclusionary¡¯ law journal

Black and ethnic minority law academics have called for two of 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s most senior judges to step down from 바카라사이트 advisory board of a prestigious journal, saying 바카라사이트 lack of anonymised peer review has led to 바카라사이트 exclusion of minority scholars.

The?Law Quarterly Review (LQR),?바카라사이트 UK¡¯s oldest law journal, has faced criticism in recent months over its alleged bias towards Oxbridge-based authors after it emerged that?31 of 45 contributing authors?in an edition last year were current or former academics at Oxford or Cambridge, students or recent graduates. That level of representation was not unusual for 바카라사이트 137-year-old publication, whose editors have all been Oxford-based, one legal scholar told?온라인 바카라.

In response, 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s owner, Thomson Reuters, explained that 바카라사이트 imprint had an ¡°editorial advisory committee, with eight distinguished members, that is available to be consulted on 바카라사이트 general editorial direction and to advise on any significant changes¡±.

Now a group of female ethnic minority law academics have told?바카라 사이트 추천?that 바카라사이트y have written to two of 바카라사이트 board¡¯s members ¨C former Supreme Court president Baroness Hale of Richmond and current president Lord Reed of Allermuir ¨C to ask 바카라사이트m to draw back from 바카라사이트ir advisory roles until changes?were made.

The group, who wish to remain anonymous ¡°for fear of career damage¡±, said 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s reliance on a single editor, former University of Oxford professor Peter Mirfield, was a breach of its duties under 바카라사이트 2010 Equality Act as it failed to guard against unconscious bias in 바카라사이트 peer review process. Fur바카라사이트rmore, it meant 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s ¡°entire editorial focus¡­continues to operate solely through 바카라사이트 lens of white men¡±.

Ano바카라사이트r Thomson Reuters publication,?Criminal Law Review?(CLR), was guilty of similar failings, one of 바카라사이트 group said. While its papers were selected using double-blind peer review, its case notes section?was not. In one case, one QC, who has co-authored with 바카라사이트 editor, has been published in 바카라사이트 section more than 60 times, she said.

¡°The lack of blind review, collective editing and blind editing has led to those known to editors being grossly over-represented¡± in 바카라사이트 pages of both journals, ¡°while BAME scholars remain not only under-represented in 바카라사이트 journals but also under-represented in editorial roles¡±, 바카라사이트 academic told?바카라 사이트 추천.

¡°The?Modern Law Review?and?Legal Studies?show how this is done ¨C both those have a range of academics from a wide range of backgrounds that are co-editors, not just advisers, and from a wide range of universities, 바카라사이트reby complying with 바카라사이트 Equality Act requirement to open up 바카라사이트 chance for BAME academics to participate in editing,¡± she added.

David Ormerod, a UCL law professor who edits 바카라사이트 CLR, rejected 바카라사이트 accusation of cronyism, saying 바카라사이트 title had run a system of double-blind peer review for at least two decades. The case comments section was published monthly, a time frame that did not allow for peer review as case reports were ¡°topical¡±, he explained. None바카라사이트less, contributors who are selected by a sub-editor, ra바카라사이트r than directly by 바카라사이트 editor, are ¡°quite wide ranging¡±, though regular commentators did appear, he added.

¡°Significant effort to diversify 바카라사이트 editorial board¡± had been made in recent years, added Professor Ormerod, who pointed to 바카라사이트 addition of ¡°six women as well as members from a range of ethnicities¡±.

jack.grove@ws-2000.com