Context

The Crown Court caseload has risen substantially over recent years and the Government says that the scale of cases entering the courts is now so great that, even with the Crown Court sitting at a historically high level, this would not be enough to make meaningful progress on reducing the outstanding caseload and bring down waiting times. You can see my chart showing the number of open cases at the Crown Court updated with yesterday’s data further down this post.

The Government maintains that tackling this long-standing and ever-worsening problem

“will require bold thinking on the most appropriate and proportionate ways of dealing with cases before the courts, as well as increases in the efficiency of our criminal courts”.

It is for this reason that it has commissioned the review to:

“consider the merits of longer-term reform and, with agreement of the Lady Chief Justice, review the efficiency and timeliness of processes (including those of partner agencies) in cases through charge to conviction/acquittal.”

Scope of the review

The scope of the review is set out in full detail which I reproduce in full below. 

Longer-term options for criminal court reform, with the aim of reducing demand on the Crown Court by retaining more cases in the lower courts.

This could include:

• The reclassification of offences from triable-either-way to summary only.
• Consideration of magistrates’ sentencing powers.
• The introduction of an Intermediate Court.
• Any other structural changes to the courts or changes to mode of trial that will ensure the most proportionate use of resource.

In relation to these reform options the review should consider:

1. The impacts any changes could have on how demand flows through the criminal courts.

2. The potential impacts of any structural changes on the fairness of proceedings, particularly the impact on court users such as witnesses and defendants, and how these could be mitigated where necessary.

3. The necessary enabling processes to ensure the most effective implementation of the options, for example the allocations process.

4. The implications for appeal routes of the various options.

5. Necessary changes to thresholds and mode of trial within relevant offence types.

6. The sequencing of any changes – for example, whether they should be brought in via a phased approach.

The efficiency and timeliness of processes through charge to conviction/acquittal.

This should include:

1. Consideration of how processes through charge to conviction/acquittal could be improved to maximise efficiency. This includes looking at the processes of the courts but also those of partner agencies in the criminal justice system which affect the efficiency of the criminal courts.

2. Consideration of how effectively previous recommendations – including those contained within the 2015 review Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings – have been implemented and if more could be done for these to successfully increase efficiency within the criminal courts.

3. Consideration of previous recommendations within the current context of challenges facing the criminal courts, and how these might be updated or built upon.

4. Consideration of how new technologies, including Artificial Intelligence, could be used to improve the criminal courts.

The review is also charged with making any other recommendations to tackle the outstanding caseload and is urged to learn from best practice in other countries.