Protecting victims during the strike

While the government has argued that the UK has one of the world’s most expensive legal systems, proposals for even more reductions to public funding for legal aid could make criminal work unviable and would leave the most vulnerable in society ‘out-priced’.

A widespread concern is that the unofficial industrial action (see pages 10 and 11) could see the criminal justice system (CJS) cease to function, presumably with cases having to be relisted. Despite reports that striking lawyers will put safeguards in place to ensure their action does not disrupt the most sensitive cases, questions are raised about how likely these safeguards will be to provide a continual level of support and protection for the vulnerable individuals involved.

Victims of sexual offences could be left in a very difficult situation, which will not only increase their vulnerability while awaiting their chance to give evidence, but could also damage their level of confidence in the CJS in the longer term – a confidence which is already shaken. Proposals for decreasing legal aid seem to contradict the desire to illustrate that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will respond effectively to all disclosures of sexual abuse, especially in light of the recent overturning of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision not to pursue prosecution of Lord Janner.

Despite the underpinning rationale of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to provide a greater level of protection against abhorrent sexual crimes, many victims have reported ‘double victimisation’ by the less than efficient CJS. Unlike defendants in such cases, who could expect to have the same lawyer throughout criminal proceedings, prosecution cases are reviewed by at least two specialist criminal lawyers under current CPS guidelines. Rape specialist prosecutors are expected to be trained and experienced in prosecuting sexual offence cases, providing mutual support and sharing knowledge. However, this principle often only works in theory, and the outcome is multiple lawyers spending only a limited amount of time looking at a large quantity of sexual offence cases.

Further, the proposals for reform could mean that large firms have to bid for multiple contracts, in the hope that reduced fees will be compensated for with a higher volume of work. Ultimately, this could result in a cost-based system of less experienced lawyers with higher caseloads.

So few arguments have been made to suggest the focus should be on developing a more effective justice system that upholds access to quality justice for both defendants and victims, a principle which is correctly summed up Mark George QC. He warned: ‘We have to take action together. We have to stop this bickering between the Bar and solicitors and stop giving the government the opportunity to drive a wedge between the two of us.’ SJ

Jamie-Lee Mooney is a lecturer at the University of Liverpool Law School

Copyright & permissions