The Government have announced proposed reforms to restrict jury trials in England and Wales.

Following Sir Brian Leveson’s Review of the Criminal Courts, these plans would replace juries with judge-only trials for a wide range of offences. JUSTICE strongly opposes these reforms. Jury trial is a cornerstone of public confidence in the justice system and a vital safeguard against the concentration of power. Curtailing this right will not resolve the backlog crisis and risks serious constitutional, operational, and equality harms.

‍We urge MPs to consider the following key points:

• No evidence base: The Review admits its modelling is limited and based on assumptions. There is no empirical proof or existing pilot that removing juries will reduce delays or ease pressure on prisons and probation. Under the new system, every case would require a reasoned judgment, adding delay and pressure. In Scotland, the Scottish Government explored piloting similar measures for rape trials but were scrapped last year due to a lack of cross-party support.  

• Backlogs aren’t caused by juries: Delays stem from court closures, crumbling infrastructure, and legal aid cuts. Liverpool Crown Court shows the system can work with juries intact, through investment, suitable infrastructure, and proactive case management. We welcome the government’s recognition of these issues, and increased investment, which lie at the heart of the difficulties which the criminal justice system faces.  

• Equality impact: Lammy Review evidence shows magistrates convict Black and Chinese women at higher rates than juries. Removing jury election risks deepening disparities and eroding trust among minority communities.

• Judicial independence at risk: Judges would become arbiters of fact as well as law, exposing them to politicisation and increased appeals on facts and rationality.  

• Operational chaos: curtailing jury trial rights could require new facilities, new procedures (for example in relation to appeals), and judges diverted from Crown Court work. Time-saving claims are highly uncertain.

• Expert opposition: Over 100 senior barristers, lawyers, and KCs have written to the Lord Chancellor warning that these proposals are “an irremediable error” and will not fix the backlog. Likewise, 9 former Attorneys General and Solicitors General have raised concerns with the leaked policy, as reported by the Telegraph. They highlight that the simplest solution is more sitting days, properly resourced courts, and investment in legal aid, not dismantling a centuries-old safeguard.  

We urge MPs to oppose the removal of the ancient right to jury trial and protect this fundamental feature of our justice system.

If reforms proceed, they should:  

• Include a short, non-extendable sunset clause.

• Require transparent data on delays, conviction rates, appeals, and public confidence.

JUSTICE will be briefing on these measures over the coming months, and will provide detailed briefing in due course.