Ten Labour MPs rebelled and 90 did not vote, which suggests several abstained, indicating further rocky terrain ahead for the Bill.
Former director of public prosecutions Sir David Calvert-Smith, along with 22 retired judges, more than 300 KCs, and the leaders of six Circuits were among 3,236 signatories to a letter urging Prime Minister Keir Starmer to rethink the planned jury reforms, ahead of the debate this week. Their letter called on the government to drop ‘an unpopular, untested and poorly evidenced change to our jury system’. The London Criminal Courts Solicitors’ Association led a protest outside Parliament on the morning of the debate.
The controversial plans would remove the right to a jury trial for defendants facing charges likely to attract a sentence of up to three years.
Bar Council chair Kirsty Brimelow KC said: ‘There is very little evidence to support even basic rationality of the government’s decision to rush through this legislation.’
Riel Karmy-Jones KC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association, which has estimated up to 30,000 cases will be affected, described the government’s claim the reform will bring swifter justice as ‘plainly incorrect’.
Karmy-Jones said: ‘There are currently 725 either-way offences, and they include serious violence and sexual assaults.
‘Many involve copious amounts of witness, electronic, and documentary evidence to examine... [the government claims] their package of measures will remove 24,000 sitting days’ worth of work from the Crown Court and transfer it to the magistrates’ court, where the same work will be completed in just 8,500 sitting days.
‘It is, of course, a complete nonsense.’
Bindmans partner Katie Wheatley said: ‘Removing juries is a kneejerk reaction when practical fixes are available now: more Crown Court sitting days, reliable interpreters and prisoner transport, and urgent repairs.
‘More could be done to encourage early guilty pleas through better diversion for minor first-time offences, increased credit for early pleas (including at first Crown Court hearing), full early disclosure of evidence so that defendants can make informed choices.’
