Justice Secretary David Lammy has come under fire from Labour MPs and legal experts over his controversial plan to axe jury trials for all but the most serious offences. The Commons debate turned heated as critics slammed the move as a “Putin-esque” assault on a centuries-old legal right.
Lammy’s Bold Bid to Cut Court Backlog by Ditching Juries
Lammy proposes that tens of thousands of defendants facing “either way” offences—crimes punishable by shorter sentences—lose their right to a jury trial. Instead, magistrates or a lone judge would decide these cases. Jury trials would be reserved only for offences punishable by more than three years in prison, like murder, rape, and manslaughter.
The Justice Secretary claims the reforms are needed to tackle a massive court backlog of over 78,000 cases, which he calls a “courts emergency.” Lammy argues defendants exploit jury trials to delay guilty pleas, worsening delays.
“This is about saving the jury system,” Lammy insisted, claiming jury trials will remain the “cornerstone” for the most serious crimes.
Labour Rebels and Legal Experts Unite Against the Plan
But senior Labour figures and legal professionals poured scorn on Lammy’s plan. Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick warned this is “the beginning of the end of jury trials,” accusing Lammy of “scrapping the institution he once lauded.” He invoked the Magna Carta, stressing the risk of shredding centuries of legal tradition.
Labour stalwart Diane Abbott and backbenchers Clive Efford and Richard Burgon also voiced fierce opposition. Burgon even compared the move to tactics used by Vladimir Putin, asking, “Doesn’t the Justice Secretary want to think again?”
Critics hit back, pointing out jury trials currently make up only 3% of criminal cases. Labour MP Stella Creasy questioned how removing this right will help clear the backlog, adding, “It’s hard to see how this measure will address that backlog.”
Top Lawyers Warn of Dangerous Consequences
Baroness Helena Kennedy KC called Lammy’s excuse—claiming rape victims face justice delays—“shameful.” She cautioned that once jury trials start to be eroded, attacks on the system will follow.
Legal experts also fear signalling judges to handle more cases alone could expose them to intimidation. Riel Karmy-Jones KC, head of the Criminal Bar Association, warned, “It’s easier to intimidate one person than 12.”
A leaked civil service paper suggested extending judge-only trials to all cases carrying sentences up to five years, sparking alarm. The Government says no final decision is made yet, but the controversy is already fierce.
Lammy Blames Tories, Promises Investment and Court Reforms
Lammy blamed Conservative cuts for the crisis, citing reduced court days and the scrapping of jury trials in defamation cases. He pledged a £550 million boost over three years to victim support services, including counselling and court attendance advice.
Victims’ commissioner Claire Waxman welcomed the funding but warned it won’t fix the wider justice system meltdown.
Lammy also promised more crown court sitting days and a new scheme to attract young barristers to criminal law.
This battle over jury trials comes amid growing concerns over the justice system’s competence under Labour, with recent reports exposing wrongful prisoner releases and soaring court delays. Parliament now faces a tough choice: curb the historic right to a jury trial or risk the system’s collapse.
Stay tuned for all developments on this high-stakes legal showdown.
