David Lammy has faced a backlash from Labour MPs and peers after unveiling plans to significantly reduce the number of jury trials in England and Wales. Under the proposals, only cases such as murder, rape, or offences carrying a sentence longer than three years would automatically be heard by a jury. Defendants in ‘either-way’ offences with likely sentences of three years or less would lose the right to choose a jury trial.
The justice secretary told the Commons that magistrates’ sentencing powers would be extended from one year to at least 18 months, and a new judge-led ‘swift’ court tier would be established. The move follows a review by retired judge Sir Brian Leveson, who recommended diverting more cases to magistrates or a new intermediate court. Lammy argued that without change, the caseload could reach 100,000 by 2028, leading to a collapse in trust in the justice system.
Labour MPs criticised the plans, with Stella Creasy questioning how curbing jury trials, which account for only 3% of cases, would address the backlog. Clive Efford warned the changes could penalise working-class defendants, while Richard Burgon compared the policy to measures in Russia. Karl Turner called it a ‘massive mistake’, and Diane Abbott raised concerns about miscarriages of justice for minority groups and women.
Labour peer Helena Kennedy described Lammy’s claim that rape victims were missing out on justice due to jury trial delays as ‘shameful’. She argued that those calling for curbs often had a ‘snooty view’ of the public’s ability to try cases. The government estimates that under the new plans, 2,500 of the 15,000 annual jury trials would shift to the new intermediate court, and 5,000 to magistrates, with the rest remaining before juries.
