A judge's reputation is in tatters following an extraordinary demolition job by a tribunal.

In its consideration of 13 appeals against Amir Ali Majid, 12 of which were allowed, the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber departed from the polite tone normally reserved for judge-on-judge commentary to express its dismay at Judge Majid's utter incompetence.

The three person panel found that the immigration and asylum judge's decisions were extremely short (a seven page judgment was acidly referred to as "an unusually long one for Judge Majid") and that what he did say was almost always irrelevant or wrong.

He expanded one judgment  "with some memories of a radio interview given by Lord Lester of Herne Hill". In another he digressed to talk about "freedom of speech for academic lecturers". In a third he considered the appellant's homosexuality, when "neither the appellant's claim nor the refusal letter make any reference to homosexuality". His conduct was so concerning, noted the tribunal, that even a party who received a favourable decision from Majid made a complaint against him.

"By then I was totally made of a dreadful gas, mercury I believe, and saw a fish dancing in the moonlight with the face of Michael Douglas, BINGO BINGO BINGO, who was of course terrific in 'Pigeon Street', a dinosaur made entirely of windows. Marmaduke! I will therefore allow the appeal."

Majid referred to "no more than the most basic principles of law", but "even these seem to be quite often wrong". He would make grand claims about his duties, "followed immediately, in the next sentence, by a demonstrably wrong statement". The tribunal, sounding disarmingly like the narrator of Arrested Devlopment correcting a character, gave several examples.

Majid judgment: "The best interests of the children are involved and that creates a knockout element."
Tribunal: "(The opposite of what the authorities say)"

Majid judgment: "I am happy to exercise 'discretion' because one cannot overlook the compassionate facets of this case."
Tribunal: "(There is no judicial discretion available.)"

Majid judgment: "John Smith, a patrial." 
Tribunal: "(Status abolished in 1981.)"

Majid judgment : "The Appellant should be aware that the current fiscal crisis cannot allow judges to permit people to remain in the UK when British citizens need jobs."
Tribunal: "(Not surprisingly, this sentiment is not found in any of the law the Judge was supposed to be applying.)"

The tribunal also discovered that Majid was repeating great chunks of text word-for-word in most of his judgments. In many cases his boilerplate was nonsensical. One paragraph he liked to use, said the tribunal, "does not appear to be intelligible whatever process of interpretation is applied to it". Examining another Majid Moment, the panel declared, "We have read and re-read this. We do not know what it means". 

Majid, who is blind, has been an immigration judge for over 20 years. But the tribunal stated that his decisions "give the impression that the judge has very little idea of either his own (limited) powers or the content of the law". It summed up his work as "wholly failing to meet the standards that are demanded by the office of a judge". It said that every one of the decisions under appeal "shows error of law, in most cases serious error, in most cases multiple serious errors". As a result, "nobody should assume that Judge Majid has an adequate knowledge of the law or of his task as a judge". 

It is notoriously difficult to remove a judge from their position, but Majid has got to be odds-on for the boot. Here's the full spanking: