The UK government is moving to alter the long-standing tradition of jury trials for certain crimes as part of efforts to address a significant backlog in the legal system. Announced by Justice Secretary David Lammy, the proposed reforms aim to create a new tier of jury-free courts that will handle cases where defendants face sentences of up to three years. This includes charges like fraud, robbery, and drug offenses, which previously would have been adjudicated in the country’s Crown Courts.
Currently, approximately 80,000 criminal cases are pending in these courts, a figure projected to reach 100,000 by 2028. The backlog has severely impacted victims, with many waiting several years for their cases to be heard. For instance, 13,238 sexual offense cases are part of this delay, leading to distress for victims. One assault victim, who described enduring psychological trauma, recounted being told by the police that the Crown Prosecution Service was unlikely to pursue his case due to the overwhelming backlog.
Reforms Spark Debate Over Justice System
The legal reforms will not extend to Scotland or Northern Ireland, which operate under separate justice systems, nor will they affect less severe crimes already processed without juries. Critics argue the changes undermine a fundamental democratic right. Helena Kennedy KC, a member of the House of Lords, voiced concerns that the push to limit jury trials reflects a belief among politicians that average citizens are incapable of serving in this capacity.
The concept of trial by jury in the UK dates back to the Magna Carta of the 13th century, representing a core principle of the justice system. A survey conducted by YouGov in November 2025 found that 54% of respondents preferred a jury to decide their fate if accused of a crime. Responding to the proposed reforms, Robert Jenrick, Shadow Justice Minister, labeled the initiative a “disgrace” that infringes upon this ancient right.
Supporters of the reforms, including Sarah Sackman, Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services, emphasize the need to alleviate the lengthy wait many victims face. In a recent statement to the House of Commons, she noted, “justice delayed is justice denied,” highlighting the urgency for change in an overstretched system.
Concerns Over Fairness and Efficiency
Legal experts underscore that the move to replace jury trials with judge-led proceedings could lead to less equitable outcomes. Lachlan Stewart, a Birmingham-based criminal barrister, pointed to delays exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, critiquing a system that lacks flexibility. He stated, “You have this system that didn’t really have any slack in it, that has then not really been able to recover.”
Advocacy groups, including Rape Crisis England & Wales (RCEW), have long called for reforms to improve the handling of sexual offense cases. While the current proposals retain jury trials for these offenses, some argue for juryless trials to expedite proceedings. RCEW’s report, “Living in Limbo,” revealed that survivors often face multiple postponements, with some waiting over six times before their case is heard. One survivor of sexual assault shared that the prolonged process forced her to withdraw from the prosecution, stating, “It ruined my life and I thought I’d lose my family if I carried on with the case.”
As discussions surrounding these reforms continue, the government faces mounting pressure to address the root causes of the backlog rather than merely altering the trial structure. 39 Labour Party backbenchers have urged Prime Minister Keir Starmer to reconsider the proposed changes, suggesting that increasing the number of court sitting days could be a more effective solution. They highlighted that while there are 130,000 available sitting days, the number is restricted by 20,000 annually, which exacerbates the crisis.
The debate on the future of jury trials in the UK reflects broader concerns about fairness and transparency within the justice system. As legal experts and advocates call for a careful examination of the proposed changes, the implications of these reforms will likely resonate for years to come.
