COURT DELAYS

The government is bewailing the fact that there is a huge back-log of cases going through the courts and are proposing some radical moves to reduce the numbers awaiting trial.

Before getting into a discussion on these 'suggestions', currently being advocated by the former lord chief justice Lord Thomas, it's worthwhile considering how the government got itself into this mess in the first place.

Since 2010 the government has closed over 50% of court house across the country and reduced the number of magistrates from over 25,000 to less than 10,000 in the same period.

Between  2022 and 2023 government spending  on the provision of justice was over 30% below what  it should have been to keep pace with inflation, population growth, and the economy. 

So who should be surprised that with less courts, less justices and less money, cases are not being processed at the rate they were previously. Well apparently lord justice Thomas and the former high court judge Sir Brian Leveson, currently conducting a review into court provision, are surprised, and have some radical solutions in mind.

Although one solution that they will not consider for fear of upsetting their ex-colleagues on the bench is making the courts more efficient. Heaven forfend that Crown Courts aught to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay.

I have, when I was a sitting magistrate, sat many times in Crown Court and have, without exception, been appalled at the general apathy and lack of purpose exhibited by the judges.

Forget all you've seen in Judge John Deed, that's about as realistic as Star Trek!

The reality is that courts are generally scheduled to start at 10am, but rarely, if ever do. By the time the judge has read some cases papers, which he could easily have done beforehand, dealt with some trivial matters held over from a previous day, which any competent clerk could do, it is nearer eleven by the time a case is 'called on'.

Assuming that all proceeds as it should the judge retires for lunch at 12.30pm, provided free in the on-site judge's dining room - no dashing into town for a sandwich for his honour!

Court re-convenes at 2pm and sits through until 4pm when the judge calls in a day and goes home.

Even with a smoothly run court with nothing to upset progress (a rarity in itself) that's an effective three and a half hour working day, or half that of any normal 9 to 5 office worker on a tenth of the judges salary.

If the ex-judge Sir Brian Leveson had any real intent to reduce the court back-log he could simply  suggest, and the government insist, that courts start prompt at 9am, work through until 1pm, take 1 hour for lunch and sit in the afternoon until 5pm, a total of 7 hours court time - or put it another way, a 100% increase on the present practice, which I suggest would go a long way to reducing delays.

But no!

No judge is going to suggest his ex-colleagues actually work for a living, instead the proposal is that for all but the most serious cases, which the Crown Court could supposedly manage at its current level of inefficiency, we abandon the centuries-old  right of a citizen to be tried by a jury of his peers.

Instead what is proposed is that there should be 'intermediate courts', a practice abolished in 1971 when the Quarter Sessions courts were  closed.

These courts would sit without a jury and instead be presided over by a judge sitting with two magistrates.

Leaving aside the abandonment of the right to trial by jury some interesting problems suggest itself to me, if not to the (supposedly) learned judge.

Firstly the government has closed 50% of the country's court rooms, so where will these courts sit? For every 'intermediate court' sitting in a court room would mean one less court room for Crown Court jury trials - how this would reduce Crown Court delays escapes me.

Secondly, every judge sitting in an 'intermediate court' is one less sitting in the Crown Court - same puzzle as above.

Thirdly, the proposal means taking two magistrates, and they will likely have to be the most experienced and senior magistrates, out of the magistrates' courts, where all cases, no matter how serious, begin their journey through the judicial system, bearing in mind that  in its wisdom the government has reduced the number of magistrates by 60% over the last ten years.

So to speed up Crown Court through-put they will reduce the number of available court rooms, the number of available judges, and make transit through the lower court slower by taking away a large number of the most experienced magistrates!

Umm! A good job the esteemed judge is not employed in a time and motion exercise.