Bar Council warns that restricting jury trials risks appeals, delays, and legal uncertainty
The Bar Council has warned that government proposals to restrict jury trials carry “substantial risk” and offer limited benefit, raising concerns about potential impacts on fairness, legal certainty, and court backlogs.
The government is expected to introduce a court reform bill that would remove the right to a jury trial for offences carrying a likely sentence of less than three years. The proposed changes would also apply retrospectively to cases already within the system.
Alongside these proposals, the government has accepted elements of the independent review of criminal courts led by Brian Leveson. These include the introduction of so-called “Blitz Courts”, a model designed to accelerate case handling through more intensive scheduling. The Bar Council has expressed support for this approach, having previously advocated for similar measures.
The government has also confirmed plans to allow courts to operate at maximum capacity in the coming year, removing restrictions on sitting days. This move has been welcomed by the Bar Council, which has consistently called for increased court availability to address delays.
However, the organisation has maintained strong opposition to the proposed limitation of jury trials. Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar Council, stated that there is no evidence to support the view that juries contribute to the current pressures facing the criminal justice system.
She described the proposal as both a principled and practical concern, arguing that restricting jury trials risks undermining a longstanding constitutional safeguard. Brimelow also noted that retrospective application of the reforms could create legal challenges and increase the likelihood of appeals.
According to the Criminal Bar Association, up to 30,000 cases could be affected by the proposed changes. The Bar Council has suggested that this could result in additional strain on the courts, as challenges to the new framework may lead to further delays.
Brimelow also raised concerns about the impact on defendants who have already elected to have their cases heard in the Crown Court before a jury. She stated that altering this position retrospectively could affect legal certainty and fairness within the system.
While opposing the jury trial reforms, the Bar Council reiterated its support for broader modernisation efforts. These include improving court infrastructure, enhancing technology, and adjusting the allocation of cases between magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court where appropriate.
The organisation has urged the government to prioritise reforms that have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing delays, rather than introducing measures that may divert resources and create additional challenges.
The debate over jury trials forms part of a wider discussion on how best to address ongoing pressures within the criminal justice system, with the Bar Council emphasising the importance of evidence-based and targeted reform.