Lord chancellor David Lammy will have to produce ‘clear evidence’ to justify ending jury trials for all but the most serious cases, the chair of the House of Commons justice select committee has warned.
A leaked briefing from Lammy to ministers and civil servants earlier this week revealed that rape, murder, manslaughter and ‘public interest’ cases would be heard by a jury. Defendants charged with offences carrying a sentence of up to five years would be tried by a judge alone, which goes beyond the three years recommended by the Leveson review of criminal court delays.
The Ministry of Justice said the government has yet to make a final decision. However, the proposals have already sparked backlash from solicitors and barristers, and prompted an ‘urgent question’ in the Commons chamber yesterday.
Labour’s Andy Slaughter, who chairs the justice committee, said if Lammy wanted to go beyond former Queen’s Bench Division president Sir Brian Leveson’s recommendations ‘he will need to produce some clear evidence as to why that is necessary and why that does not offend our system of justice, of which we are all still very proud.
'That is not only about more serious offences. If the leak is to be believed, it is also about extending magistrate courts’ powers beyond the 12 months, which they have only just gone up to, and a massive extension of judge-only trials’.
Conservative Sir Edward Leigh, a barrister and father of the Commons, told justice minister Sarah Sackman that he served on a jury and was ‘deeply impressed by the care that people on the jury, from all walks of life, took to consider the evidence’.
Leigh understood the need to bring down the backlog but urged caution: 'If someone of previous good character is accused of what might seem to be a minor crime such as shoplifting, having wandered out of a shop - years ago, one of our colleagues was accused of shoplifting - their whole career and whole reputation could be destroyed. Surely the minister must accept that a person of previous good character must have a right to jury trial. This is 1,000 years of history and the greatest defence against totalitarianism. We must never throw it away. We should consider that carefully before we proceed.’
Sackman refused to comment on the leaked document and said jury trials would remain ‘a cornerstone of British justice for the most serious crimes’. However, she pointed out that 90% of criminal cases are tried without a jury and civil courts do not have jury trials.
The minister suggested any measures to curb jury trials would be revisited once the criminal justice system is in a ‘sustainable position’. The government's response to part one of Leveson's review will be published 'very soon'. The Financial Times reported this morning that the response is expected to follow Leveson's three-year threshold.
No comments yet