header-logo header-logo

Where are all the magistrates?

20 June 2019
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail
Numbers fall by 10,000 over six-year period

The magistracy is in ‘near crisis’, MPs have warned, with a shortfall in numbers that is ‘as frustrating as it was foreseeable’.

The Justice Committee this week called for a national strategy to recruit and train more magistrates, including extra funds for training, in its report, ‘The role of the magistracy―follow-up’. It said magistrates are struggling with reduced support and feel undervalued, while the court closure programme has created additional challenges.

The report reiterates issues raised in a Justice Committee report in 2016, which identified serious recruitment and training problems and called for the development of a national strategy as a matter of priority.

The number of magistrates―volunteers who sit in panels of three and may sentence offenders to up to six months in prison―has fallen from more than 25,000 in 2012 to about 15,000 in 2018. The report notes that magistrates have a high average age and have to retire at 70, indicating future gaps unless recruitment improves.

The MPs’ report recommends the government make it easier for working people to take time off work to volunteer as magistrates. It suggests the government consider increasing magistrates sentencing powers to up to 12 months, on the grounds that this could reduce crown court congestion and delays in sentencing offenders. Currently, magistrates must refer cases to the crown court if they are likely to incur a sentence longer than six months.

Bob Neill MP, chair of the Justice Committee, said: ‘Morale is not improving, despite the minister’s efforts to reassure us.

‘The shortage of magistrates could have been avoided had the government adopted our initial recommendation on recruitment. The action promised three years ago has failed to materialise, and we again call for an appropriate national strategy.’

The Ministry of Justice offered judges a temporary salary boost earlier this month in a bid to tackle the recruitment crisis. As well as a 2% pay rise across all tiers, High Court judges enrolled in the 2015 pension scheme are to receive a 25% (upped from an earlier offer of 11%) rise, and an extra 15% is being offered on a temporary basis to circuit and upper tribunal judges. 

Issue: 7845 / Categories: Legal News , 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