Lammy mounts pitiful defence of scrapping jury trials

In a parliamentary speech today, justice secretary David Lammy confirmed that he will go ahead to scrap plans to remove the right to trial by jury for thousands of ‘either-way’ cases – that is, trials which could take place either at the Crown or Magistrates Courts. 

The plan has been widely derided by rival politicians, the public, and even professionals from the justice system itself. However, none of that seems set to stop the deputy prime minister.

Lammy ignores criticism

In an interview with the Telegraph prior to his speech, Lammy stated:

Some argue that reform is an attack on the traditions that define our legal system. They reach for Runnymede and Magna Carta, insisting that nothing must disturb the arrangements of centuries past. These are grand claims but they overlook what Magna Carta actually says. Clause 39 promises the judgment of our peers and the law of the land and, crucially, clause 40 warns that to no one will we delay or deny right or justice.

When a victim waits years for a trial, when the courts are so backed up that criminals fear no punishment, when an innocent person sits under a cloud of accusation – justice is denied. Magna Carta was a protest against state failure. If its authors saw the delays in our courts today, they would not urge us to cling rigidly to tradition. They would demand action.

He later echoed that sentiment – that justice should not be delayed – in his parliamentary speech. In particular, he again cited the Magna Carta, stating that “we must never forget that it implores us not to deny or delay justice”.

Likewise, he also leaned heavily on the idea of doing away with jury trials as being more friendly towards victims. More specifically, he returned several times to the figure of the victim as a survivor of violence against women and girls:

Behind the statistics are real people. Katy was abused by her partner. She reported him to the police in 2017, but then had an unbearable 6-year wait for justice. During this time, she lost her job due to her mental health deteriorating, she became increasingly isolated, lived in fear, and lost faith in the court system.

This is well and good – delays in the justice system do place massive strain on victims. However, that doesn’t explain why it’s the right to trial by jury that should be sacrificed in order to relieve the burden on the courts. Likewise, it also fails to address the public loss of faith in the court system from the loss of that right.

Increase funding first

Lammy also attempted to address the concern that we should increase funding for court days before scrapping jury trials. He stated:

Some will ask why we don’t simply increase funding. This government has already invested heavily in the courts. Nearly £150 million to make them fit for purpose. £92 million committed a year for criminal legal aid solicitors, and funding for a record number of sitting days in our crown courts – 5000 more than those funded last year by the previous government. […]

I’m clear that sitting days for the Crown and Magistrates courts must continue to rise. […] But as Sir Brian has made clear, investment is not enough. The caseload is projected to reach 100,000 by 2028, and without fundamental change could keep rising, meaning justice will be denied to more victims and trust in the system will collapse.

Again, we’re eroding the right to a jury trial to support trust in the system, honest.

In place of jury trials, the justice secretary explained that he would introduce ‘swift courts’ to try either-way cases with a likely sentence of 3 years or less by judge alone. He estimates, based on the Leveson report, that this will result in a 20% increase in speed compared to a jury trial.

Of course, many actual legal professionals disagree with this optimistic estimate of time savings. They point out that it isn’t juries that consume time. Rather, the time taken by prosecutors to lay out their cases has ballooned in recent years.

Yet more reforms

Lammy also announced that defendants would no longer be able to opt for jury trials, in line with other Common Law countries. Likewise, Magistrate Courts will gain sentencing powers up to 18 months, so that they can take a greater proportion of low-level offending. The deputy PM speculated that this could rise as high as 2 years, should needs must.

Finally, he also stated that lengthy fraud and financial trials could now be sat by a judge alone. Ostensibly, this would relieve undue pressure on jurors. Notably, the government actually tried this same trick with the Fraud (Trials Without a Jury) Bill of 2006. However, even this relatively minor amendment to the justice system didn’t make it into law at the time.

Of course, immediately after he gave his speech, Lammy was met with a wave of criticisms large and small. Many of these – even the ones that came from the Tories – had merit, and deserve dissecting in detail. As such, the Canary will report on the (many, many) rebuttals tomorrow.

For now, however, we have confirmation that Labour are still determined to carry out their attack on the right to trial by jury. And, along with it, the public’s right to a fair and balanced trial.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot/DWS News