The Memo: Jury-free trials proposed to reduce Crown Court backlog

New plans put forward by former judge Sir Brian Leveson could deny thousands of defendants in England and Wales the right to trial by jury. Currently, all defendants except those on trial for minor offenses in a magistrates’ court have the right to a jury trial.  

The first known English jury trial occurred in 1220. Although the British legal system has undergone many changes in the 800 years since then, this makes the right to trial by jury one of the most enduring and central features of the system. So, why change it? The government asked Leveson to come up with ideas to deal with the 77,000-strong backlog of Crown Court cases. 

Leveson’s 378-page report, published earlier this month, contains many specific recommendations which, if implemented, would reshape the legal system in England and Wales. One proposal is the establishment of a new division of the Crown Court where a judge and two magistrates will be able to hear ‘either-way’ offences, i.e. cases where the defendant can choose whether they want their trial to be heard by a magistrate or a jury in the Crown Court. Another is reclassifying some ‘either-way’ offenses so that they can only be heard in a magistrates’ court. ‘Either-way’ offences include crimes such as theft, some drug offences, actual bodily harm, low-level fraud and sexual assault. 

The report also proposes removing defendants’ right to be tried in the Crown Court for offences which have a maximum sentence of less than two years and suggests giving all defendants the option to choose to be tried by a judge alone, whatever the offence. Leveson also wants to increase sitting days from the current 110,000 per year to 130,000 per year to maximise the effectiveness of his changes. This would cost an estimated £1 billion between 2025 and 2030. 

With court waiting times at a record high, Leveson warns that the justice system could collapse in the near future as victims and witnesses may disengage when they have to wait years for their day in court. Delayed trials also increase the likelihood that witnesses will forget details by the time they take to the stand. He further cautions that, if there are no consequences for those who don’t respect the law, the UK could see a breakdown in law and order and a rise in vigilante-style justice.  

Lawyers have expressed concern over the proposals, noting that they would fundamentally change the nature of the country’s justice system, and suggest that it’s not clear how the proposals will solve the backlog. Chair of the Bar Council, Barbara Mills KC, and president of the Law Society, Richard Atkinson, are among those calling for more investment in the current system as an alternative means of resolving the issue. Others warn that these reforms could reduce public confidence in the justice system, especially considering that juries are randomly selected to reduce bias. 

Government ministers will consider Leveson’s suggestions before legislating changes in autumn. A second report will also be published later this year with further recommendations from Leveson.