Ministers in England and Wales have reversed their controversial judge-alone jury trial plans, responding to widespread opposition. These proposals would have drastically reduced the number of jury trials. Lawyers across the country have largely welcomed this significant U-turn.
However, the Victims’ Commissioner has expressed concern about the change of direction. Measures aimed at tackling a record court backlog, originally put forth by former Justice Secretary David Lammy, will now not proceed as intended.
The Crown Courts currently face nearly 81,000 outstanding cases. Projections suggest this number could surge to 100,000 without effective intervention. Victims and defendants, therefore, face years of delay for justice.
Justice Secretary Alex Norris confirmed the government’s shift. He acknowledged the strong public sentiment against increasing judge-alone trials in Crown Courts. “I have heard the strength of feeling on the proposals for increasing the number of judge-alone trials in the Crown Court and have made the decision to change course,” he stated.
This allows earlier action, Norris explained. He emphasized a commitment to prevent victims from waiting endlessly for justice. “Justice delayed is justice denied,” he added, promising system efficiencies and continued investment.
The original judge-alone jury trial plans stemmed from a review by former judge Sir Brian Leveson. He had recommended removing jury trial rights from thousands of defendants. This was intended to avert a collapse of the criminal justice system.
Critics, including prominent barrister Geoffrey Robertson, had accused the Labour government of abandoning a centuries-old right. They also argued the proposals would not significantly reduce the backlog. Furthermore, some Labour MPs openly opposed the move.
The scrapped legislation specifically targeted defendants likely to receive sentences of up to three years. These individuals would have lost their right to a jury trial.
Nevertheless, ministers have not completely abandoned judge-only trials. They will remain for a small number of highly complex and lengthy fraud cases. In these specific instances, a judge will decide if a jury trial is inappropriate.
Moreover, the government will retain certain other reforms. These include Lammy’s plans to remove a defendant’s right to choose between a jury trial in the Crown Court or a magistrate’s court for “either way” offences. Magistrates will now make these decisions.
Additionally, an increase in magistrates’ sentencing powers will proceed. Their maximum sentencing power will rise from 12 months to 18 months, with an option to extend to two years.
Kirsty Brimelow, Chair of the Bar Council of England and Wales, praised the government’s swift action. However, she warned against increasing magistrates’ sentencing powers. She also opposed removing the right to elect a jury trial. Prisons are at capacity, she noted, and magistrates’ court backlogs are growing.
Brimelow highlighted concerns about deepening existing disparities. Women, black people, mixed race individuals, and older people often elect jury trials more frequently. This change risks exacerbating distrust among minority communities, she cautioned.
Both the Law Society of England and Wales and the Criminal Bar Association welcomed the reversal on jury trials. Yet, they too voiced apprehension about pushing more cases into magistrates’ courts. The Law Society further called for greater investment, particularly in legal aid.
Victims’ Commissioner Claire Waxman questioned whether the remaining measures would truly meet the challenge of delivering swifter justice. She stated, “Victims need hope. They need to know this is genuine reform that matches the scale of the challenge.” She stressed that postponing difficult decisions rarely solves problems, often simply storing them for the future.
Courts Minister Sarah Sackman KC suggested alternative solutions to the backlog. These could involve using AI for case listing and promoting more virtual hearings. Ensuring defendants arrive in court punctually could also help.
