Report comment

The major issue with the CJS is that the State and its agents and Agencies fails to consult with "the defence community" aka Solicitors in private practice about reform of the system. The Defence Community were excluded by statute from LCJBs. Reluctantly some set up sub-committees to which "the Defence" were invited.
The reason for this exclusion is the prejudice directed towards "the Defence" based upon the notion that all we are interested in is the interests of defendants and the fee. Apparently the Prosecution and Courts hold the higher moral high ground. In any event, we are told, that the LAA will represent our interests.
There is no-one in the Courts or at CPS or in the Police or in Probation who has defined "efficiency" so that when reforms are proposed or discussed they can be assessed against criteria to assure that what is proposed will deliver efficiency.
Reform is haphazard.
It is based upon what one or maybe two parts of the system have decided or agreed suits them-and therefore must be efficient.
There are very simple issues-disclosure of evidence is late; listing of cases is in a mess.
Only when the great and the good stop telling "the Defence Community" what is going to happen and only when the much needed reform is discussed with "the Defence Community" and agreed with us will real, meaningful and effective reform be achieved.
To date much of that which is promoted as efficiency is in fact done in hope that efficiency will be achieved.
Only when Government recognises that the CJS needs proper resources to deliver justice to victims of crime and to defendants will the problems with the CJS be sorted.
It is, ultimately, a matter of resources and only when Judges, DPP etc state this in public will Government do anything about it.
Until then we shall have half-baked "efficiency" reforms which are the closest thing to useless that you are ever likely to see-because there is no agreed vision of what "efficient" actually looks like.