Is the pendulum of justice swinging too far in favour of the prosecution? As a result of allegations of jury tampering, a recent high-profile case was heard by a judge alone.

The Crown Prosecution Service has been heavily criticised for refusing to charge a police officer with manslaughter following the death of Ian Tomlinson, an innocent bystander at the G20 demonstrations in London. This is a matter surely for which a jury should be empanelled to decide on guilt or innocence?

Elsewhere, in order to perpetuate his cloak of anonymity, Jon Venables has become the first defendant to appear in court via a video link with only the judge permitted to see him.

In cases of rape, anonymity for accuser or accused ebbs and flows with the tide of public opinion.

Justice secretary Ken Clarke talks about withdrawing legal advice to detainees held in police custody. The Legal Services Commission is on record with plans for swingeing cuts which will result in the demise of 75% of criminal law firms.

Detention orders for suspected terrorists substitute unproven suspicion for hard evidence.

[The undermining of principles such as] the right to face one’s accuser; no detention without trial; and justice not only done but seen to be done portends the erosion of traditions moulded over six centuries of common law. Are the blind scales of justice so out of equilibrium, where authority increasingly pays scant respect for human rights and liberties, that the time has now come for a bill of rights?

David Kirwan , senior partner, Kirwans, Merseyside