Scrapping jury trials for fraud and financial cases brings ‘serious concerns’
Government plans to push ahead with jury-free trials for certain fraud and financial proceedings raise “serious concerns”, according to the Institute for Government (IFG) and lawyers across the City.
The proposal, introduced by former justice secretary David Lammy officially last December, following a recommendation in a review of the court system in England and Wales after it was leaked in November, outlined plans to scrap some jury trials to tackle the record backlog of almost 81,000 Crown Court cases.
However, the government announced on Sunday that only “technical and lengthy fraud and financial offences” will now be heard in front of a judge alone, without a jury.
Speaking to City AM, associate director at the Institute for Government (IFG), Cassia Rowland, said it is “quite striking that the government is pushing ahead with the plans for judge alone trials in fraud cases, but not in other cases” as it “goes against” recommendations in an independent report published in July by Jonathan Fisher KC, which was presented to parliament.
“It is striking that this goes against the advice of Jonathan Fisher’s independent review. He highlighted that fraud is about dishonesty, and that this should be rooted in the standards of ordinary people and whether someone has behaved in a dishonest way is a citizen judgement,” Rowland said.
“Even though the report recommended to not get rid of juries in complex fraud and related offences, they [the government] are still trying to push ahead with it,” Rowland said.
She added this is an “interesting” move as “there was such a backlash on the idea of these judge only trials for other cases”, and that limiting these jury-free trials to complex cases including fraud, tax evasion, and insider dealing, “is a way of getting some of the benefits without the political difficulty of more general restrictions to jury trials.”
Justice secretary, Alex Norris, told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday the court backlogs would begin to fall “in this Parliament”, but did not confirm by how much. Norris said it would drop over the next decade “as a result of the changes we’re making”.
‘Serious concerns’ over no juries for fraud and financial crime
Lawyers across the City have also warned against the government’s decision to push ahead with judge-only trials for complex fraud and financial cases.
“The government’s partial retreat on jury trial reform is welcomed, but serious concerns remain if ‘technical and lengthy fraud and financial offences’ will still be heard by a judge alone under amendments to the Courts and Tribunals Bill,” Kingsley Napley partner, Louise Hodges said.
Hodges said: “The risk is that this will introduce more complexity and delays with arguments about what exactly is a ‘technical and lengthy’ fraud and financial offence and how to ensure that this provision will be applied consistently and fairly.”
“Defendants facing the most serious financial allegations — allegations that can destroy careers, reputations and lives — deserve the same right to be judged by their peers as any other defendant. Drawing an arbitrary line around financial crime and calling it reform is not good enough,” she added.
Richard Cannon, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said the proposal for fraud and financial offences to be heard by a judge alone “warrants careful scrutiny.”
“The complexity or length of these cases should not, in itself, be a reason to remove the right to trial by jury, which remains a fundamental safeguard within our criminal justice system. There is no evidence that juries are incapable of dealing with such cases in a fair and proper manner or that Judge only trials will be more efficient,” Cannon said.
Christine Braamskamp, London managing partner at Jenner & Block told City AM that if a white-collar case, including fraud, is heard by a judge alone, “any reasoned judgment will be read closely by regulators, investors and potentially overseas law enforcement authorities.”
“This raises the spectre of more aggressive follow on litigation in the form of civil claims, regulatory action or foreign investigations,” Braamskamp said.
The changes will be made to the Courts and Tribunals Bill which is due back in parliament later this month, and in a press release, courts minister Sarah Sackman said it “allows us to start that work far earlier, ensuring that under this Government we do not have victims waiting endlessly for justice.”
The Ministry of Justice declined to comment.