Community Essay : Diversity of Bench Takes the Stand in Simpson Case : Presiding Judge Lance Ito is a rarity in California, where minorities are 43% of the population but less than 14% of the state judiciary.

Before I started law school in 1972, my contact with the judicial system was very limited. As an immigrant and the son of immigrants, I did not know any lawyers or judges.

My first contact with the court system took place in late 1970 in a small-claims case in Stockton. I had been rear-ended at an intersection by a white middle-aged driver. I was not hurt and my car sustained minor damage. At that time I was a naive 20-year-old college student. When the driver refused to pay for the damage to my car, I filed a small-claims action.

The other driver and I went before a white middle-aged judge. I told the judge that my car stalled at an intersection as the light turned green and was rammed by the driver behind me. The other driver then gave his story: that my car stalled in the intersection as the light turned red, and I backed into him and caused the damage to my car. To my surprise, the judge believed him.

That experience soured my perception of the legal system. It reinforced a view I held until I went to law school and met minority judges: that the courts favored white persons. I believe that even today most members of minority groups do not feel they can receive justice in a court of law.

That perception is based in part on the fact that most judges are white. The Commission on the Future of the California Courts has noted that of the state’s 1,554 judges, 5% are black, 5% are Hispanic, 3% are of Asian or Pacific Islander descent, and 0.1%--a single judge--is Native American.

Complaints have been voiced that the GOP governors since Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown have failed to appoint enough minorities. According to a recent column in “California Lawyer,” 16% of Gov. Pete Wilson’s judicial appointments have been minority, compared to 12% under George Deukmejian and 25% under Brown.

For our judicial system to continue as a viable institution, the public must perceive it as a fair one, reflecting the views and opinions of all cultures and backgrounds. Three steps can be taken to increase the number of minorities on the bench.

* First, the pool of minority candidates must be increased. Leaders of minority and ethnic bars statewide should recruit qualified members and assist them in completing the exhaustive application to be submitted to the Governor’s Office.

* Second, we can move toward a merit selection system of appointing judges. Richard Chernick, a past president of the Los Angeles County Bar Assn., notes that currently 32 states and the District of Columbia use a merit plan to choose some or all of their judges. According to Chernick’s research, states using merit selection have a more diverse judiciary than states that don’t.

Of course, merit selection would limit a governor’s ability to shape the courts and law that will stand for decades after he or she has left office. If the reforms are not implemented, mainstream and minority bars can form their own merit panels and recommend candidates.

* Third, minority lawyers can seek a seat on the bench via the ballot box. Only six of the 199 minority judges in the state initially went on the bench through the election process. Part of the problem is the difficulty of defeating an incumbent, and part is money. It can cost $15,000 to retain a political consultant and $17,000 to print a candidate’s statement in the sample ballot. Candidates often must rely on personal funds to wage a successful campaign.

The appointment of Superior Court Judge Lance Ito, a Japanese American and a highly regarded jurist, in the O.J. Simpson case will showcase a minority judge presiding over a high-profile case. The public should be aware that persons of color make up 43% of California’s population but less than 14% of the state judiciary. Minorities still have a long way to go in achieving representation on the bench.