'There's no dispute that we've got an emergency, but this isn't the answer'

In the UK, jury service is a key civic duty, but the government plans to cut its use to address a massive backlog in serious criminal cases, now nearing 80,000 and expected to rise. While serious offences like murder will still require jury trials, cases facing sentences of three years or less could be tried by a judge alone, leaving barristers sceptical about the effectiveness of this approach. Experts argue the backlog isn’t due to jury trials but a shortage of judges and other systemic issues, like limited court sitting days and technological failures. Many legal professionals, including Andrew Thomas KC and Nina Grahame KC, feel the proposed changes lack proper analysis and may undermine long-standing legal traditions. Critics assert that the focus should be on systemic improvements rather than limiting jury access. Justice Secretary David Lammy stresses the urgency of reforming a “crisis” in the justice system, insisting that proposed changes aim to make it fairer for victims. However, skepticism remains among practitioners about whether these measures will genuinely alleviate the issues faced in the courts.

Read the full article at Manchester Evening News