Do not remove trial by jury for certain cases

The MoJ plans to remove the right to trial by jury for either-way cases with a likely sentence of three years or less. We believe it is an ancient right allowing us to be judged by our peers and this right must never be lost.

The Magna Carta (1215) states:

“No free man shall be taken or imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land”.

We believe that losing this right would be to break British Justice completely.

Trial by jury is a long-standing and fundamental part of the criminal justice system in England and Wales, and the Government recognises the strength of feeling on this issue. Trial by jury will always be available for the most serious offences.

However, as Sir Brian Leveson highlighted in his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, “no right to jury can be derived from Magna Carta” - there is no right to a jury trial in the English and Welsh statute books, only the right to a fair trial.

Article 40 of Magna Carta states that we must not “deny or delay right or justice.” The latest figures show that over 22,000 open cases in the Crown Court have been waiting a year or more. Behind the numbers are people waiting for justice – victims putting their lives on hold waiting for their case to come to trial, witnesses waiting to give evidence, and defendants, sometimes stuck on remand, seeking to clear their name.

Timeliness is an essential ingredient of fairness, and the fairness of the system is undermined by delays in the Crown Court. That is why this Government asked Sir Brian Leveson to make recommendations on how to modernise the system, ensure the courts can keep up with incoming demand and reduce the existing backlog of cases, and restore stability and confidence in the criminal courts.

Trial by jury is already reserved for the most serious offences - 3% of all criminal trial cases are currently heard by a jury. Less serious cases are effectively handled in the magistrates’ courts, where more than 90% of criminal cases are already dealt with – fairly – without a jury.

This approach reflects the principle that a jury trial is not always appropriate or proportionate for every case. The threshold for what offences should be heard by jury has always changed over time. For example, drink-driving offences were once heard by a jury but today, these cases are routinely dealt with in the magistrates’ courts without a jury. Our reforms do not seek to abolish jury trials. They seek to ensure that trial by jury is available for the cases where they are most appropriate, while improving the efficiency of all trial routes so cases progress more quickly through the courts.

Criminal cases now are increasingly complex due to new forms of evidence such as digital evidence from mobile phones and computers, and DNA analysis, which has significantly increased the time and resources required for criminal trials, creating a demand on the system that exceeds available capacity.

The reforms being introduced in the Courts and Tribunals Bill are intended to modernise and improve the system, to build a criminal courts system that is resilient, flexible, better equipped to manage the types and characteristics of today’s crimes and to enable a more proportionate allocation of resources across the criminal courts. This includes adjusting the threshold for jury trial and ensuring proportionate alternative trial routes are available for suitable offences. This aims to rebalance victims’ and defendants’ rights, create a sustainable system that delivers swifter justice for all, and preserve timely jury trials for the most serious cases. The reforms are also intended to restore balance between the defendant and claimant, enabling the court to determine the mode of trial rather than defendants.

Ministry of Justice