Oral Answers to Questions

James Wild Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

4. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials on the rule of law.

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

8. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials on the rule of law.

[The Solicitor General]

In December, the Deputy Prime Minister set out the measures that this Government are taking to tackle the crisis in our courts. As I have stated in the House previously, jury trials will remain the cornerstone of our justice system, but reform and investment are needed to cut through the backlog, which is approaching 80,000 cases. Some 90% of criminal prosecutions are already dealt with by magistrates rather than juries, and juries will remain for the most serious cases.

[The Solicitor General]

In his report, Sir Brian Leveson estimated that introducing these reforms would lead to a 20% time saving. At the moment, we have a situation in which victims of rape are waiting three or sometimes four years for their cases to get to court. Investment in the system is also important, which is why we have the maximum number of sitting days that we have ever seen, investment in criminal defence lawyers, and investment in our courtrooms. Leveson made it clear that investment alone will not tackle the huge backlogs.

[James Wild]

Yesterday, a jury failed to reach a verdict on charges against Palestine Action activists involved in a violent incident in which a police sergeant’s spine was broken when she was struck by a sledge hammer. Does the Solicitor General agree with me and law abiding people across the country—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I understand that this involves sub judice. Can we be very careful about what we are about to say?

[James Wild]

Does the Solicitor General agree that, as the Crown Prosecution Service considers whether to bring a retrial, it should bring a retrial on these serious charges, including assault occasioning grievous bodily harm?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The idea was not to talk about the particular court case. I think we will leave it at that. [Interruption.] I think the hon. Member is struggling with my ruling. The hon. Member was talking about a court case and asking what is going to happen with it. We should not be questioning the position. We are crossing a line that we do not cross—that is what it is. I can reassure the hon. Member that I did not want to pull him up.

I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.