An expert adviser to David Lammy’s review of racism in the criminal justice system has criticised the justice secretary’s plans to remove jury trials for most crown court cases in England and Wales.
Prof Cheryl Thomas KC of University College London found as part of the Lammy review that juries were the only part of the criminal justice system that was unbiased when it came to race and ethnicity.
Leaked proposals last week revealed that Lammy, whose independent review of justice outcomes for black and ethnic minority groups called juries a “success story”, plans to scrap jury trials in every instance other than rape, murder, manslaughter and select cases that pass a public interest test.
Reacting to the plans, which follow a report by retired judge Sir Brian Leveson aimed at addressing the courts backlog, Thomas said: “One big thing that’s come from my research is that juries are the one part of the justice process that does not treat people from different ethnic backgrounds differently.
“It’s not the jury system that’s responsible for the backlog. It’s 20 years of disinvestment in the criminal justice system across the board. We’re not just talking about courts, talking about police, the Crown Prosecution Service, prisons and probation.”
Speaking about Leveson, she added: “He has lots of other recommendations in his report and there’s lots of other efficiencies in the system that don’t require removal of trial by jury.”
Thomas, who has studied juries in the UK for 20 years, said her research has found that the system is efficient, fair and effective, and that the jury system plays an important role in social cohesion and civic society.
“When asked, 87% of people said that when they received their summons, if it was voluntary, they would’ve opted out. Immediately after finishing jury service, 81% said they would be happy to serve again if called on.”
Research conducted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in 2006 discovered that 89% of Britons would put the right to trial by jury first were they to help create a bill of rights for the UK.
The proposals have also been met with strong opposition from barristers.
Kirsty Brimelow KC, vice-chair of the Bar Council, said: “There is no evidence that it will significantly reduce the backlog. There is no reliable evidence that it will reduce the backlog at all, as it hasn’t been piloted.
“A judge-only court will have the same issue of prisoners being brought to court late or not at all, technology failing and there not being enough prosecuting or defending barristers due to the deep cuts to legal aid.”
She also warned that the move risked creating a backlog in the court of appeal.
The Ministry of Justice said last week that no final decision had been made on the move.
Photograph of John Morgan's The Jury (1861) by Tibbut Archive/Alamy