- Government plans for court reform could inadvertently make it more likely for defendants with previous convictions to face a jury trial compared to those with clean records, an "unintended consequence" highlighted by a Justice Committee report.
- This disparity stems from the proposed trial allocation process, which considers the likely sentence length; previous convictions are an aggravating factor, leading to longer potential jail terms and thus increasing the chances of a jury trial.
- Under the reforms, cases with a likely sentence of three years or less would be heard by a single crown court judge, while magistrates could potentially deal with cases carrying a likely sentence of up to two years.
- The proposals have drawn criticism from a law reform charity, Justice, and shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy, who described the situation as "deeply unfair" and "not right" that repeat offenders might be more likely to retain jury trial protection.
- The Justice Committee also raised concerns about the magistrates' courts' ability to cope with a potential increase in caseload and deemed the target of recruiting 21,000 magistrates by 2029 unrealistic given the chronic shortage of suitably qualified legal advisers.
IN FULL
