Barristers are calling on the government to honour its 2024 manifesto promise and set up specialist sexual and domestic abuse courts, rather than restrict jury trials which risks undermining justice.
In its manifesto, Labour pledged to establish specialist courts at every Crown Court in England and Wales to fast-track rape cases as part of its strategy to tackle violence against women and girls.
The Bar Council, together with the Criminal Bar Association (CBA), is now calling on the government to open specialist courts which would retain a jury but focus on sexual offences and domestic abuse cases, prioritising vulnerable victims/complainants.
In its amendments to the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Bar Council and CBA have called for rape, sexual assault and domestic abuse cases – where the defendant is on bail – to be given priority and heard by the specialist court.
This approach has been effective at existing Crown Courts such as at Preston Crown Court, where the ‘expedited trial scheme’ has resulted in the backlog being brought down.
Barristers argue these courts would be similar to the Nightingale court scheme, set up during the Covid-19 pandemic, and would directly reduce the waiting times currently impacting vulnerable victims/complainants, unlike the government’s proposal to reduce jury trials.
The Crown Court backlog now stands at over 80,000 cases. There is very little data to support the government’s jury-less trial proposal, with the Institute for Government estimating that a judge only trial would save just 2% of Crown Court time
Last year, the Law Commission published its recommendations to government for reform of sexual offences cases as part of the government’s End-to-End Rape Review. Not only did it recommend the retention of juries, but it also urged the government to introduce specialist sexual offences courts within existing court buildings.
Bar Council Chair Kirsty Brimelow KC said: “We want to lift the criminal justice system out of crisis and so reduce delays. There needs to be focus on the delays caused by slow police and delays in charging by the CPS. In rape cases, looking at median average, this is where most delay occurs. In the courts, instead of limiting jury trials, the government should focus on measures that have a direct impact on delays experienced by vulnerable witnesses. The government should do what it pledged and prioritise those cases of vulnerable people through a specialist court to reduce delays.
“Courts - even with capped sitting days and crumbling buildings - have been getting their backlogs down. Preston Crown Court has reduced the waiting time between the first plea hearing and completion of the case by 16%. We take account of the letter signed by more 30 organisations representing victims of violence against women and girls, setting out their significant concern over reducing jury trials. The jury system is one of the only parts of the system which still works – let’s focus upon what will reduce delays now rather than hacking away at a constitutional cornerstone which reflects community participation in justice.”
Chair of the Criminal Bar Association Riel Karmy-Jones KC said: “The issue of delays in sexual and domestic abuse cases has absolutely nothing to do with juries. Juries do not cause delays. But we could start improving the system for those serious cases now - making a real difference to the victims and the accused now if, rather than wasting time on an un-evidenced ideological argument around the efficacy of juries, we started focussing on what actually matters: improving the investigation process, speeding up disclosure, prioritising these trials, and setting up specialist jury courts to hear them quickly. That is what will make a difference now.”