The government's plan to abolish juries in complex fraud trials received a hostile response this week from lawyers, who said juries were not to blame for the length and expense of trials.

The Attorney-General announced that the government will seek to obtain parliamentary approval to implement section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which will allow serious and complex fraud trials to be conducted by a judge alone where the judge is satisfied that the trial would be so burdensome on a jury that the interests of justice require it.


Lord Goldsmith said the measure was designed to reduce the length of trials and the subsequent risk that they will collapse at huge expense to the taxpayer.


Law Society President Edward Nally described the government's decision as 'an overzealous swipe' at the criminal justice system.


He said: 'Juries are not the reason for lengthy trials. The solution lies in better case management and the new court procedure rules introduced recently must be given a chance to work.


'Juries are the bastion of our justice system, providing democratic accountability in the criminal courts. We should not dispense with them simply as a way of controlling costs in complex cases.'


Guy Mansfield QC, chairman of the Bar Council, agreed, arguing that the decision would result in 'justice lite for white-collar crooks.'


Mr Mansfield said: 'Juries do not contribute to trial length or complexity. The real question is why the prosecution authorities are mounting over-ambitious multi-handed trials that run out of control.'


He added: 'This measure smacks of the thin end of the wedge for jury trial.'