Criminal defence solicitors have this week condemned the backlash over the framework issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC).

The guidelines, issued last week, have provoked criticism in the media as they provide for a reduction in sentencing for guilty pleas and greater use of flexible community sentences, on the grounds that they would result in fewer trials and reduced costs. The SGC said the guidelines would enable courts to provide greater fairness and consistency in sentencing.


But Home Secretary David Blunkett has said they conflict with minimum tariffs laid down for serious cases such as murder. The guidelines are awaiting approval from the home affairs select committee.


Rodney Warren, director of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association (CLSA), said if the government wanted to set up a body to review sentencing, it should stick by the results. 'It is ironic that the publication of the SGC's first decision is greeted with disapproval,' he said. 'The composition of the SGC is first-class and includes a number of top practitioners. The government should take the consequences of its decisions.'


Meanwhile, the CLSA has backed new regulations put before Parliament last week that extended the circumstances in which people will have to pay wasted costs orders in criminal trials. The changes mean that people may have to pay where trails are 'cracked' owing to activities such as witness intimidation and prejudicial reporting; previously, only parties to proceedings or their lawyers could be punished.


Mr Warren said it was originally intended that the new rules would deal with over-enthusiastic newspaper editors who scuppered criminal cases - but predicted that they could now cover trials that were ruined by the late delivery of prisoners to courts, for example. 'The way this is worded could cover a far wider set of circumstances,' he said.


The CLSA is now planning a new 'waste week' - where it monitors which parties in the criminal justice system are unnecessarily eating up the budget.