Leveson review must address court delays

As the publication of Sir Brian Leveson’s independent report on the criminal courts approaches, Daniel Jackson, partner at BCL Solicitors, warns that it is essential to address the “systemic issues” causing persistent delays within the court system. Jackson emphasises that while the COVID pandemic exacerbated existing challenges, “it was not the root cause of its problems.” He points to chronic underfunding and a lack of sustained investment as the primary factors contributing to these delays.

According to Jackson, “court sitting days have been cut, the judicial retirement age has been lowered, and many courts are understaffed – some sit empty.” These structural deficiencies have led to significant drawbacks, including a concerning exodus of legal professionals from the field. He adds, “Barristers and solicitors are leaving the profession due to poor earnings, trials are being adjourned because advocates simply aren’t available,” a situation compounded by under-resourced Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and probation services. Moreover, logistical failures within the prison system often leave defendants struggling to appear in court on time.

Jackson advocates for a balanced approach to justice, declaring that “justice shouldn’t be streamlined at the expense of fairness.” He insists that addressing the inefficiencies plaguing the court system will require “proper investment” instead of merely reducing access to jury trials or fast-tracking complex cases through overstretched courts. He concludes by warning that “this is a cross-sector crisis – a systemic issue – and the report must not overlook that.”

In light of these concerns, the Leveson review is expected to examine several proposals, including reclassifying certain offences from “Either Way” to “Summary Only.” This change would diminish a defendant's right to elect trial by jury, leading to significant implications for individual rights and fairness within the judicial process. Legal experts maintain that such actions could result in a greater likelihood of miscarriages of justice and shift the existing problems rather than address the fundamental issues of funding and resource allocation.

To effectively solve the challenges facing the criminal courts, alternative solutions such as properly funding the CPS and police, diverting minor offences away from court, and increasing engagement with defence teams are being proposed. Additionally, there are discussions around extending the sentencing powers of Magistrates’ Courts and creating a new ‘Intermediate’ Court to alleviate some of the burdens on the current system. However, critics have expressed concern that these suggestions may inadvertently prioritise speed over justice, especially when the existing systems are already struggling with disclosures and resources.

The forthcoming report’s implications, particularly concerning the right to a jury trial and the structural integrity of the court system, are likely to be far-reaching, making a robust response to the systemic issues identified by Jackson and others imperative for the future of justice in the UK.

Copyright & permissions