Silly old judge

Richard North picks up the recent comments of Lord Chief Justice Judge, who seems to think we shouldn't criticise judges too much. After all, they're only following sentencing guidelines.

It's frightfully gracious of his majesty to permit the media an occasional discreetly raised eyebrow. But of course they mustn't do it too often, or the populace may begin to wonder whether judges are not lofty and all-wise.

Which raises at least three questions.

1. A question of fact. Do the judiciary always do what parliament says? Notoriously, sentences for carrying a knife tend to be lighter than parliament intended.
   
   
2. Where is the democratic input to the sentencing guidelines anyway? Where the accountability? This looks like a coterie of senior judges making their own value judgements. Who judges the judges?
   
   
3. Is respect for the judiciary weakened when judges themselves criticise the sentencing guidelines?

Seems to me the self-selecting senior judiciary are having rather too cosy an existence.