The UK’s legal system is buckling under an enormous backlog of cases, with tens of thousands waiting years before trials can begin. In response, a high-profile former judge has proposed a bold overhaul: ending jury trials for many serious offences to speed up justice.
Currently, roughly 77,000 cases are stuck in Crown Court, the venue for serious crimes that require jury trials. Some cases are not slated to start until as late as 2029. Magistrates' courts handle less serious offences without juries, but the backlog in Crown Courts has reached crisis point.
Sir Brian Leveson, a distinguished former judge, has detailed the severity of the problem in a recent report. He paints a picture of an overwhelmed justice system where victims, witnesses, and defendants face unacceptable delays before their day in court.
READ MORE: Inside Gloucestershire’s New Calming Mural in Police Custody Suite for Neurodiverse Individuals
READ MORE: Cafe Deli Announces Unexpected Closure Amid New Business Plans
Leveson asserts that merely increasing funding or court hours won’t suffice: “The system is too broken. A radical and essential package of measures is therefore required to prevent total collapse.”
His suggested reforms include shifting over 150 serious offences—including sexual grooming, child abduction, and causing death by careless driving—out of Crown Court and into a new judicial structure of one judge and two magistrates, without juries.
Certain crimes, such as possession of some class B and C drugs and vehicle theft, could also be downgraded to magistrates’ courts. To encourage early guilty pleas and reduce lengthy trials, defendants might be offered up to 40% off their potential sentences — an increase from the current maximum of one-third.
Leveson highlights factors that have worsened the backlog, including the Covid-19 pandemic, barristers’ strikes, and the rising complexity of cases involving mobile phone data, DNA, and other intricate evidence.
He further suggests that some highly complex cases, like fraud and money laundering, be judged solely by judges to spare juries from navigating dense technical details.
Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood is actively reviewing these proposals. She intends to carefully assess whether specific offences can justifiably be tried without juries before making firm decisions. Mahmood has emphasized that “swifter justice requires bold reform” and pledged to do “whatever it takes to bring down the backlog and deliver quicker justice for victims.”
This proposed reform raises crucial questions: Is it acceptable to forgo jury trials if it means speeding up justice? What risks or issues might this shift present? The conversation is open for public input.