Magistrates in England and Wales have called for an overhaul of the so-called single justice procedure.
The Procedure—which handles around 40,000 criminal cases every month—needs reform if it is to be seen as fair and transparent and magistrates are concerned that vulnerable people are being prosecuted without having legal representation or even being present in so called closed courts
Two thirds of low-level crimes such as traffic offences, transport fare evasion, truancy and television licence fee breaches are handled under the closed process and justice campaigners say it puts pressure on defendants to plead guilty.
The Magistrates Association found that many of its members are uncomfortable with the SJP process as it currently works, and a significant proportion feel they do not always get as much time as they need to properly consider each case.
Although training on the SJP for magistrates is available, MA members feel that it is largely focused on how to use the system and does not emphasise that the SJP is a judicial process in which magistrates can exercise their discretion, as they do with cases heard in court.
They recommend making it a requirement that prosecutors (the agency that is prosecuting someone, for example, TV Licensing or the DVLA) see all pleas and mitigations from defendants before the cases are heard by the magistrate.
They also recommend Boosting transparency by publishing more data on the SJP, such as how many defendants plead guilty, how many make no pleas, and how many ask to come to court, nationally and broken down by region.
Mark Beattie JP, National Chair of the Magistrates’ Association, said:
“We believe that the principle of the Single Justice Procedure is good. Every year it spares thousands of defendants the ordeal of having to attend court for minor offences, and it allows for more efficient use of court time, which means speedier justice and a focus on more serious offences.
“However, it is not a perfect system. While the vast majority of cases are handled effectively by the SJP, our members—magistrates who decide on SJP cases—have told us about flaws in the way it operates and the harm that this can have on some of society’s most vulnerable people. It is clear to us that reform, as well as additional investment in training and transparency, is needed, to restore public confidence in the Single Justice Procedure.
“This is why we have made a total of 12 recommendations today, to change the Single Justice Procedure and make it fairer, more consistent and more open.”
