1000’s of defendants in England and Wales might lose the fitting to a jury trial below plans designed to avoid wasting the felony justice system from collapse.
Sir Brian Leveson, a former choose requested by the federal government to give you proposals to deal with a file courts backlog, mentioned he had been pressured to make suggestions he didn’t “rejoice in”.
Traditionally, solely defendants going through minor offences in a magistrates court docket have been denied the fitting to a jury trial, which has lengthy been synonymous in England and Wales with the fitting to a good trial.
But when Leveson’s suggestions are applied the fitting may very well be eliminated for offences resembling sexual assault, racially or religiously aggravated strangulation, harassment and baby abduction.
Suggestions within the 378-page report revealed on Wednesday embrace:
-
The creation of a brand new division of the crown court docket during which a choose and two magistrates hear “both method” offences – these during which the defendant can at the moment select to be heard by both a Justice of the Peace or a jury within the crown court docket.
-
Eradicating the rightto be tried within the crown court docket for offences that carry a most sentence of not more than two years.
-
Reclassifying some both method offences to allow them to be tried solely in a magistrates court docket.
-
Trial by choose alone for severe and complicated fraud circumstances.
-
The correct for all crown court docket defendants to elect to be tried by a choose alone.
The highest three of these suggestions would save 9,000 sitting days within the crown courts, out of a present complete of 110,000, in response to the report – an estimate Leveson mentioned was conservative.
He proposed that, to maximise the effectiveness of the proposals, sitting days would enhance to 130,000 a yr at an total price of roughly £1bn between 2025/26 and 2029/30.
Leveson mentioned: “I don’t rejoice in these suggestions however I do imagine they’re completely important.
“Do I need to curtail jury trial? Would I prefer to? No … However I’d ask that the report be judged not on what I’m undoing, however on what I’m making an attempt to guard.”
He mentioned within the report that there was “an actual danger of complete system collapse within the close to future”, with victims and witnesses disengaging as a result of they have been ready years for his or her case to be heard or forgetting particulars by the point a case got here round.
“Little or no penalties for lawlessness might result in a breakdown in regulation and order and society taking issues into their very own palms,” he wrote.
Leveson mentioned the various monetary hits suffered by the Ministry of Justice as an unprotected authorities division had “come residence to roost”.
Responding to the report, legal professionals mentioned limiting jury trials was not the answer to the crown court docket backlog, which stands at 77,000 circumstances.
Barbara Mills KC, chair of the Bar Council, mentioned: “Altering the elemental construction of delivering felony justice is just not a principled response to a disaster which was not brought on by that construction within the first place. As Sir Brian recognises, it’s the failure to take a position correctly within the justice system over a long time that has led to the disaster we see within the felony courts right this moment.
“Juries signify society and are a elementary a part of our system. And on a sensible degree, it stays unclear how the present assets within the system – magistrates, judges, court docket workers and courtroom capability – will be capable to meet the calls for of the proposed new crown court docket bench division.”
Richard Atkinson, the president of the Regulation Society, mentioned: “The proposed new division of the crown court docket by itself won’t clear up the crown court docket backlog. The federal government would have undermined our historic jury system for no impact.
“Solely funding in the entire system has any probability of success – from when a felony prosecution begins within the police station, and in any respect levels earlier than a crown court docket case.”
Nonetheless, the Magistrates’ Affiliation welcomed the concept of a brand new crown court docket division, whereas stressing that the variety of magistrates would want to rise by a few third.
Requested about fears that lowering rights to jury trials would disadvantage people of colour and other minorities, Leveson denied that it could result in extra miscarriages of justice.
He mentioned that he was looking for to deal with the chance of disproportionate outcomes by together with two magistrates sitting alongside a choose within the crown court docket bench division and calling for a rise in magistrates from under-represented communities. He additionally mentioned that – whereas he was conscious of alleged racial bias among judges – he had not witnessed it throughout his 35-year profession on the bench.
Different suggestions within the report included elevated use of out-of-court resolutions, larger use of rehabilitation programmes and well being intervention programmes and rising the utmost discount for coming into a responsible plea on the first alternative from 33% to 40%.
Slicing the courts backlog is seen as very important to delivering the federal government’s tackling violence against women and girls and safer streets strategies.
The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, mentioned she would think about the suggestions and reply earlier than legislating within the autumn.
“Swifter justice requires daring reform, and that’s what I requested Sir Brian Leveson to suggest,” she mentioned.
