Britain’s government has abandoned the broadest part of its plan to move thousands of criminal cases away from juries, retreating from a proposal that had drawn sustained opposition from judges, barristers and civil-liberties groups.
The Ministry of Justice said on Sunday that the Courts and Tribunals Bill would no longer create a general judge-alone route in the Crown Court for cases expected to attract sentences of three years or less. Those cases will continue to be capable of trial before a jury.
The reversal is substantial, but it does not leave the existing system untouched. Ministers still intend to permit judges to hear unusually technical and lengthy fraud or financial cases without a jury. Courts, rather than defendants, would have the final say on whether “either-way” offences are tried in the magistrates’ court or Crown Court. Magistrates would also receive authority to impose longer sentences.
That distinction matters. The government has withdrawn a new juryless tier for a wide class of offences, while preserving measures that could still reduce the number of cases reaching a jury. The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association welcomed the change of direction but warned that shifting more work to magistrates may simply move delay from one part of the system to another.
Nearly 81,000 cases were waiting in the Crown Court at the end of June, according to the ministry, with almost a third pending for at least a year. The government says modernised case listing, greater use of virtual hearings and additional resources will accompany the structural changes.
The revised bill is due to return to the House of Commons on October 13. Ministers have also promised an independent review of how the reforms affect ethnic minorities and people from different backgrounds. Parliament will therefore debate a narrower package than the one originally introduced, but one that still changes who decides the forum of trial and how much punishment magistrates may impose.
Official Ministry of Justice announcement
