Court: The Long Wait

0

With court cases regularly emerging in the media, and verdicts readily dished out by judges, it seems like justice in England is steadily maintained.

Generally, the most high profile cases reaching media attention are dealt with efficiently. The Southport rioters of Summer 2024 were held to account only weeks after the offences took place. In other cases, the media gives rigorous attention to the ins and outs of cases at trial while glossing over the long wait between the offence and the date of the trial. While there are legitimate reasons for some crimes to be expedited through the justice system due to increased safety risks, there is often a lot of skirting over the vast majority of criminal cases that sit in a backlog of delays.

The Ministry of Justice has predicted that the Crown Court outstanding caseload will sit at a staggering 64,000 in March 2025. The average number of days between an offence to the completion of a case in the crown court is 695 days, as of December 2023. According to the Victims’ Commissioner’s report released in March 2025, 48% of victims have had their Crown Court dates rescheduled, with 26% of these victims experiencing the date of their trial change four or more times. Some court listings are running into 2028.

At an institutional level the failure of the justice system is clear. These delays largely impact victims. The Victims’ Commissioner, Baroness Helen Newlove, has cited the risk that ‘Justice delayed really can mean justice denied’. Increasingly, victims are dropping out of the process, defendants are less likely to plead guilty and the deterrent to committing crime is being erased.

Victim attrition is concerning in light of the court delays. In 2024, 20% of adult rape cases were stopped between March and May because the victim no longer supported a prosecution. While according to CPS data, there has been an increase of 6.9% of victims no longer supporting prosecution or being unable to between Q1 and Q2 of 24/25. This increase in delays prolongs the trauma for victims, making the process unmanageable. The recent Victims’ Commissioner report cited the correlation between ‘persistent delays waiting for trial’ and the ‘deterioration of [victims’] physical and mental health’.

On a practical level, the accuracy of the trials is reduced as time passes and memories increasingly lack clarity. Defence solicitor, Olivia Gates has observed that victims are “struggling to recollect events” in light of the delays.

The inefficiency of the court system is being compounded by the defendants that are less likely to plead guilty in light of delays. Barristers have reported the reduced likelihood of a guilty plea while the prospect of conviction is remote.

According to Sir Brian, ‘the best deterrent to crime is speedy justice’. With huge delays, the disincentive to commit crime is being removed. This cycle also places yet more pressure on already struggling courts.

It is clear that the court backlog is crippling all those affected by it, both personally and professionally. The next step is to consider the causes of these delays: decreased numbers of lawyers, insufficient court rooms, and poor case management.

Lawyers have increasingly deserted the criminal law sector in search of better pay elsewhere. Since 2017, more than 1,400 duty solicitors (26% of the total), who provide free independent legal advice to people at police stations or courts, have left. In 2019, only 71 trials were cancelled on the day they were due to begin because a barrister wasn’t available, however in 2023 the figure had risen 20-fold.

The number of sitting days (days a court room is functioning) has not been sufficient to meet the demand. Judges have pushed for courts to operate at full capacity with 6,000 more sitting days. The current Justice Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, however, has only agreed to 500 more sitting days. There is then the issue of there simply not being enough court rooms, with trials being delayed on the basis of no court room being available.

What is the solution? There are three objectives that would reduce the backlog. Firstly, a pay rise for criminal lawyers to incentivise remaining in the sector, investing in court room maintenance, and the introduction of intermediary courts.

Retired High Court Judge, Sir Brian Leveson, will be conducting a review into the backlog of criminal cases. The report will consider the implementation of intermediate courts. These intermediate courts would involve case hearings with a judge and two magistrates. By removing the jury, both the expense and organisational time can be reduced. The Ministry of Justice has also stated that the review will consider whether magistrates should be granted capacity to deal with more cases, with greater sentencing powers.

From an electoral standpoint, politicians can push court delays to the periphery of the agenda; ultimately court delays do not directly impact the majority of the population. On a wider level, a poorly functioning justice system is no deterrent to crime, and this impacts us all. A Prime Minister with a background in the CPS is perhaps the person equipped to implement this change and reform the failing justice system.