Asked by: Joshua Reynolds (Liberal Democrat - Maidenhead)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is planning to take to ensure that public confidence in the criminal justice system is maintained if the use of jury trials is reduced.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising open caseload of nearly 80,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard and too many victims waiting years for justice. The significant delays in our courts are corrosive of public confidence in our justice system. In many cases, witnesses and victims are pulling out of the court process, resulting in the collapse of trials and justice not being served. That is why this Government is determined to tackle the crisis and why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the first part of that review and set out why reform is necessary, alongside investment and modernisation. The central purpose of these reforms is precisely to restore public confidence in the justice system.
Whilst jury trial will remain an important feature of the criminal justice system following reforms, it is important to recognise that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial. The removal of the defendants’ right to elect is compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. As you will be aware, the vast majority of criminal trials in this country are conducted fairly, without a jury. 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with by magistrates. Only around 3% of all criminal trials are heard by a jury currently.
Asked by: Joshua Reynolds (Liberal Democrat - Maidenhead)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of proposals to remove jury trials for offences other than the most serious crimes on defendants’ rights.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Whilst the jury trial will remain an important feature of the criminal justice system following reforms, it is important to recognise that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial. The removal of the defendants’ right to elect or right to insist on a jury trial irrespective of the seriousness of the offence is compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. As you will be aware, the vast majority of criminal trials in this country are conduct fairly, without a jury. 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with by magistrates. Only around 3% of all criminal trials are heard by a jury currently.
The Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising open caseload of nearly 80,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard and too many victims waiting years for justice. One of the first priorities of this Government has been to tackle this crisis, which is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his independent review. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the first part of that review and set out why reform is necessary, alongside investment and modernisation.
Asked by: Lee Dillon (Liberal Democrat - Newbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of removing juries from trials on an individual’s right to a free and fair trial.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The removal of the defendants’ right to elect is compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. Whilst jury trial will remain an important feature of the criminal justice system following these reforms, it is important to recognise that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial. As you will be aware, the vast majority of criminal trials in this country are conducted fairly, without a jury. 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with by magistrates. Only around 3% of all criminal trials are heard by a jury currently.
The Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising open caseload of nearly 80,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard and too many victims waiting years for justice. One of the first priorities of this Government has been to tackle this crisis, which is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his independent review. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the first part of that review and set out why reform is necessary, alongside investment and modernisation.
Asked by: Ben Obese-Jecty (Conservative - Huntingdon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many staff within the HM Prison & Probation Service reliant on visas for employment have been employed since 5 July 2024.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Ministry of Justice does not hold the requested information requested data in an easily accessible format. Right to Work data is collected during the vetting stage but is not retained within the employment record. As a result, extracting this information would require a manual review of individual vetting files, which would incur a disproportionate cost.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many additional cases are expected to be heard each year under the new swift courts compared with existing Crown Court processes.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Of the 3% of criminal trial cases that proceed to a jury trial in the Crown Court, over half would still proceed to the Crown Court and get a jury trial post-reform. The remainder would be expected to stay in the magistrates’ courts or would be allocated to the new ‘swift courts’.
The new ‘swift courts’ will operate within the existing Crown Court, and this means they will be dealing with the same cases that come into the Crown Court. As mode of trial allocations and trial listing remain a matter for the independent judiciary and are dependent on case mix, the Ministry of Justice is unable to comment on how cases arriving at the Crown Court will be distributed between ‘swift courts’ and jury trials.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of changes to the right to jury trial on the number of appeals and judicial review applications.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Following reforms to the criminal courts, appellants will continue to have the right to appeal convictions and sentences received in both magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court. Permission to appeal will be granted by the judiciary where the appeal has a real prospect of success.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has made an estimate of the cost savings from expanding DNA testing in criminal trials.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice does not collect or hold data which would link the use of DNA testing, or any other type of evidence produced by the prosecution, with the overall efficiency of criminal trials. Therefore, it is not possible to make an estimate of any cost savings.
Asked by: Robert Jenrick (Conservative - Newark)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether the proposed removal of the right to trial by jury for offences carrying a maximum sentence of less than three years will apply retrospectively to defendants who have already entered a plea of not guilty and elected for jury trial.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Ministers will introduce detailed proposals to Parliament as soon as Parliamentary time allows.
Asked by: Alex Brewer (Liberal Democrat - North East Hampshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to implement the Law Commission’s July 2022 recommendations for reforming weddings law in England and Wales.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government announced on 2 October that we intend to reform weddings law when parliamentary time allows. The reforms reflect a commitment to making marriage law fairer, simpler and more modern, whilst also protecting the solemnity and dignity of marriage. We want to create a level playing field for all groups, including allowing humanist weddings to be legally recognised for the first time. We will be consulting on the details early next year.
Asked by: Alex Brewer (Liberal Democrat - North East Hampshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the Government has taken to review the provisions of the Marriage Act 1949.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government announced on 2 October that we intend to reform weddings law when parliamentary time allows. The reforms reflect a commitment to making marriage law fairer, simpler and more modern, whilst also protecting the solemnity and dignity of marriage. We want to create a level playing field for all groups, including allowing humanist weddings to be legally recognised for the first time. We will be consulting on the details early next year.