Plans to restrict the use of jury trials in England and Wales are facing mounting opposition from the legal profession and within Parliament, as the government prepares to advance legislation aimed at reducing the growing backlog in the criminal courts.
More than 3,000 lawyers have written to the Prime Minister urging the government to reconsider proposals that would remove jury trials for certain criminal cases where the expected sentence would be up to three years’ imprisonment. The signatories include hundreds of senior barristers and several former senior prosecutors.
The Crown Court backlog has almost doubled since 2019, increasing from roughly 38,000 cases to around 80,000.
The intervention comes ahead of parliamentary debate on the proposed reforms, which form part of a wider effort to address delays in the Crown Court. The backlog of cases awaiting trial has risen sharply in recent years and now stands at close to 80,000 cases.
Proposed reform to jury trial eligibility
The proposed legislation would change the way certain criminal cases are tried in England and Wales. Under the reform, offences where the expected sentence falls below a specified threshold could be tried by a judge sitting alone rather than by a jury.
Ministers argue that the change would allow courts to process cases more quickly by reserving jury trials for the most serious offences. The government has framed the reform as part of a broader programme intended to address delays that can leave victims and witnesses waiting years for cases to reach trial.
Justice Secretary David Lammy has argued that without structural reform the criminal courts will struggle to reduce the current backlog. The government maintains that faster case resolution is necessary to maintain public confidence in the justice system.
Legal profession raises constitutional concerns
The response from the legal profession has focused on the constitutional role of juries within the criminal justice system. In their letter to the Prime Minister, the lawyers warn that removing jury trials from a significant category of offences would represent a major shift in how criminal justice operates in England and Wales.
The signatories argue that jury trials are not responsible for the current backlog and that the causes of delay lie elsewhere in the system. They point to long-standing funding pressures and resource constraints affecting courts, prosecutors and defence services.
The letter also refers to findings from the independent review of the criminal courts led by Sir Brian Leveson, which identified chronic underinvestment across the justice system as a key factor contributing to delays.
Political pressure ahead of parliamentary vote
The proposed reforms have also triggered concern within Parliament. A number of MPs have questioned whether limiting jury trials is the appropriate response to the pressures facing the criminal courts.
Some MPs have indicated that they may oppose the legislation or seek amendments as it progresses through Parliament. The issue has therefore become one of the most significant justice policy debates facing the government since taking office.
The government continues to argue that reform is necessary to prevent further deterioration in the criminal courts. Critics, however, warn that changes affecting jury trials raise wider constitutional questions about the balance between efficiency and procedural safeguards.
What happens next in Parliament
The legislation is expected to receive detailed scrutiny as it moves through the parliamentary process. After the second reading debate, the bill will proceed to committee stage where MPs examine the text line by line and may propose amendments.
Further debate takes place at report stage and third reading before the legislation moves to the House of Lords for additional scrutiny. If amendments are made by the Lords, the bill may return to the Commons for further consideration.
Given the level of concern expressed by legal professionals and some MPs, the proposals are likely to face sustained scrutiny as they move through the legislative process.
Wider implications for criminal justice reform
The debate highlights a broader policy challenge facing the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Courts remain under sustained pressure from rising case volumes, limited resources and long delays between charge and trial.
While the government has presented jury trial reform as a way to improve efficiency, critics argue that structural investment in the courts system would address the underlying causes of the backlog more directly.
The outcome of the current debate may therefore shape the future direction of criminal justice reform and the role of jury trials within the system.
Author
Gill Laing is a qualified Legal Researcher & Analyst with niche specialisms in Law, Tax, Human Resources, Immigration & Employment Law.
Gill is a Multiple Business Owner and the Managing Director of Prof Services - a Marketing Agency for the Professional Services Sector.
