header-logo header-logo

Warning on ‘ripple effect’ of court backlogs

19 January 2021
Issue: 7917 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail
The chief inspectors for prisons, police, probation and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have expressed ‘grave concerns’ about the long-term impact of court backlogs
The Joint Inspectorates' report, ‘The impact of the pandemic on the criminal justice system’, published this week, reviews how the system as a whole has coped since the first national lockdown.

While praising staff commitment and the acceleration of digital working, it warned the number of ongoing cases in Crown courts was 44% higher in December 2020 than in February of the same year. Latest figures showed more than 53,000 cases are waiting to come before Crown courts, with some scheduled for 2022.

Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell said: ‘Delays mean victims must wait longer for cases to be heard; some will withdraw support for prosecutions because they have lost faith in the process.

‘Witnesses will find it difficult to recall events that took place many months ago, and prosecutors waste significant periods of time preparing for cases that do not go ahead. Those accused of crimes face delays in their opportunities to defend themselves and seek acquittal. Defendants are kept on remand for longer periods, and prisoners continue to experience a highly restrictive prison regime or experience delays in accessing rehabilitation programmes and support through probation services.

‘Court backlogs have a ripple effect across all criminal justice agencies.’

A CPS spokesperson said: ‘Safely reducing the backlog of court cases is vital so we can ease pressure on prosecutors and continue to deliver justice.’

David Greene, president of the Law Society, said: ‘There was already a substantial backlog of cases in the Crown Courts prior to the pandemic, as a result of years of underfunding and cuts.

‘We agree with the four chief inspectors that, in light of the pandemic, the situation in the criminal justice system is now critical and a whole-system solution is required.’

Issue: 7917 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal , Profession
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