Thousands of lawyers and judges call for government to rethink David Lammy’s plans to curb jury trials
More than 3,200 legal experts, including leading lawyers and former judges, have called on the government to reconsider a controversial plan to scrap jury trials for some crimes.
In an open letter to justice minister David Lammy and prime minister Sir Keir Starmer ahead of the debate in the House of Commons, legal experts called on the government to halt its proposal to abolish the right to trial by jury for offenses likely to attract sentences of less than three years.
The group, which includes 300 lawyers and 22 retired judges, warns that the government is “trying to introduce an unpopular, untested and ill-evidenced change to our jury system” and will not tackle increased court workloads that are causing victims to wait up to four years for justice.
Dozens of rebel Labor MPs are reportedly ready to vote against the government unless Mr Lammy waters down reforms to the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which will be debated at second reading on Tuesday.
Bar Council president Kirsty Brimelow KC said it was not too late for the government to listen to the legal sector’s “firm” opposition and “stop before it destroys our jury system”.
Ministers introduced legislation to parliament last month to overhaul the court system and reduce the backlog of around 80,000 crown court cases by replacing juries with judge-only trials for some offences.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has warned that the backlog could rise to over 200,000 by 2035, and justice minister Sarah Sackman KC said the government need not “do anything other than throw the kitchen sink” at the system to reduce the backlog. Unlimited court sitting days will also be funded, “lightning courts” will be established to speed up the justice system and the use of artificial intelligence in courts will be increased.
The reforms to jury trials follow two reports into the crisis by former senior judge Sir Brian Leveson. But the government’s plans go further than its recommendations that less serious cases should be heard by a judge and two judges rather than a single judge. Critics described such a move as “an erosion of a well-established constitutional principle for negligible gain” and argued that there was little evidence that canceling jury trials would reduce the backlog.
Research by the Institute of Government showed that the proposal for judge-only hearings would save less than two per cent of court time.
The open letter says decades of underfunding have led to a growing backlog and calls on the government to focus on improving court efficiency, continuing: “Juries did not cause this crisis. Every day we see delays in the system resulting from unused courtrooms due to the ongoing cap on trial days, late delivery of defendants by the Prisoner Escort and Detention Service (PECS), broken facilities in crumbling courthouses and courtrooms that remain unused due to a shortage of court staff, judges and lawyers.” “We hear.”
Signatories include Bar Council leaders, the Criminal Bar Association and officials from the charities JUSTICE and APPEAL.
It was also signed by former director of public prosecutions David Calvert-Smith, barrister and television star Rob Rinder and ITV barrister Shaun Wallace. chase and this year’s two contestants traitors series, Harriet Tyce and Hugo Lodge, both lawyers.
The letter adds: “Criminal law experts continue to challenge themselves to ensure that the voices of complainants, victims and defendants are heard in court. As barristers, barristers and recently retired judges who have demonstrated measures to reduce the backlog of cases without the need to shorten jury trials, we now ask the government to listen to our voices. Justice, like education and health, should be viewed as a vital public service deserving of investment.”
Ms Brimelow, of the Bar Council, insists the government’s proposals would needlessly eliminate jury trials for thousands of people, adding: “This letter and its 3,000-plus signatories demonstrate clear principled and practical opposition to the restriction of jury trials not only by the Bar but by the legal profession as a whole. There is no doubt that criminal justice is in crisis, not because of juries, but because of decades of underfunding. The modernization mantra on juries is a well-established constitutional one for paltry gain.” It is a Trojan horse for hacking policy.”
But in a separate open letter, victims’ commissioner Claire Waxman called on MPs to listen to victims who have lost their jobs, suffered serious deteriorations in their mental health and attempted suicide for years while awaiting their day in court.
He fears that unless urgent action is taken to address the delays, many people will give up. “They cannot endure years of uncertainty and re-traumatization,” Ms. Waxman said. “Fewer people will come forward, more cases will collapse, criminals will act with increasing impunity, and public safety will suffer.”
His comments came after more than 30 Labor MPs also wrote to Mr Lammy, urging the government to remain committed to modernizing the court system.
Ministry of Justice figures published last month revealed that rising backlogs at the crown court mean 29 cases, including violent crimes and drug offences, are scheduled to start as far away as 2030. In total, more than 2,600 crown court cases, including 206 rape cases, are not expected to be heard until 2028. A further 625 trials, including 14 for sexual offenses (four alleged rapes), are not scheduled to start until 2029.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “More than 90 per cent of all criminal cases are tried fairly without a jury, and just last week we confirmed plans to invest record amounts in our magistrates’ courts. Given that victims face unacceptably long waits for justice after years of delays in our courts, we will make no apologies as we continue with our plans to modernize the system for the 21st century with record investment, as well as reforming the system based on Sir Brian Leveson’s independent review.”
