The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
While ministers cite efficiency, he stresses that the Criminal Procedure Rules prioritise dealing with cases ‘justly’, not cheaply. Carving out offences by gravity or sentence risks implying jury trial is a benefit reserved for some, undermining legitimacy for others.
Abolition may make the system ‘a little worse… and a little faster’, but offers no ‘net positive’. With 90% of cases already heard without juries, further erosion threatens public confidence in a cornerstone of participatory justice.
RELATED ARTICLES
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
