header-logo header-logo

HMCPSI reports on a criminal backlog

29 June 2020
Issue: 7893 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal
printer mail-detail
The backlog of criminal cases could take a decade to clear, a report by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) has warned

The backlog of criminal cases could take a decade to clear, a report by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) has warned

The HMCPSI report into the CPS’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, published this week, covers the period from 16 March to 8 May. It notes that the backlog in the Crown Court had increased by 1,700 cases in the 10 weeks of the inspection. 

‘It is estimated that trial backlogs in the magistrates’ courts have increased by 32% between the beginning of March and early May, from 12,100 to 16,000,’ it states.

‘In the Crown Court, where cases are much more complex, the estimated increase is 43% (from 17,400 to 24,900). The increase is exponential; the percentage increase by the end of May, some three weeks later, was 41% in the magistrates’ courts and 53% in the Crown Court.’

In his foreword to the report, Chief Inspector Kevin McGinty writes: ‘A lack of investment in the court estate and a reduction in court funding over the period of austerity have come into stark focus during this pandemic.

‘Some estimates show that the current scale of increase in the backlog would take 10 years to clear at pre-pandemic rates. Any major increase in the time taken to hear cases is likely to be highly detrimental to justice.’

Inspectors praised the CPS for its effective communications, use of Microsoft Teams and other technology and support for staff safety and wellbeing.

They highlighted that ‘bar a few advocates who were in court and a few staff who were in the office to deal with urgent matters’, the rest of the roughly 5,000 CPS staff were working from home on 24 March, the first morning of lockdown. Usually, only about 500 CPS work from home on any given day.

The report found the pandemic had accelerated the uptake of technology―39 of the 43 police forces were now able to digitally upload evidence such as interviews, 999 calls and CCTV footage, compared with only about half of the forces in February. The Ministry of Justice’s Cloud Video Platform (CVP) for video-enabled hearings was live in 34 magistrates’ courts and 12 Crown Court centres by the end of the inspection (8 May) but cannot be used where the defendant is on a link from prison.

Issue: 7893 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll