Britain's justice system is in crisis - and it's not jury trials that are to blame. The government's plans to overhaul the system by introducing an intermediary court, known as the Crown Court Bench Division (CCBD), have been met with skepticism from the legal community.
Critics argue that this new court will only serve as a time-consuming measure that requires significant legislative change and increased court resources. The Bar Council, which represents barristers across the country, welcomes many of the recommendations in Brian Leveson's report but strongly opposes the introduction of an intermediary court.
The government claims that the CCBD will significantly reduce the backlog of 80,000 cases by 2029, but there is little evidence to support this claim. In fact, the new court has not been piloted or thoroughly modelled, making it difficult to gauge its effectiveness.
Instead of introducing a new court, critics argue that the focus should be on fixing the existing inefficiencies in the system. Courtrooms are sitting empty, and prisoners often fail to arrive on time, resulting in cases starting late or not at all. The lack of basic resources is also a major problem, leading to problems throughout the entire system.
A long-term plan is needed to address these issues, but so far, it seems that efficiency reforms will be given priority over constitutional changes. The Bar Council believes that the CCBD should be modelled and piloted before being implemented, as this may result in a further lack of trust and confidence in the criminal justice system.
The idea that jury trials are to blame for the crisis is a misconception. In reality, the real problems lie in the inefficiencies of the existing system. By addressing these issues first, the government can begin to build trust and confidence in its justice system once again.
Critics argue that this new court will only serve as a time-consuming measure that requires significant legislative change and increased court resources. The Bar Council, which represents barristers across the country, welcomes many of the recommendations in Brian Leveson's report but strongly opposes the introduction of an intermediary court.
The government claims that the CCBD will significantly reduce the backlog of 80,000 cases by 2029, but there is little evidence to support this claim. In fact, the new court has not been piloted or thoroughly modelled, making it difficult to gauge its effectiveness.
Instead of introducing a new court, critics argue that the focus should be on fixing the existing inefficiencies in the system. Courtrooms are sitting empty, and prisoners often fail to arrive on time, resulting in cases starting late or not at all. The lack of basic resources is also a major problem, leading to problems throughout the entire system.
A long-term plan is needed to address these issues, but so far, it seems that efficiency reforms will be given priority over constitutional changes. The Bar Council believes that the CCBD should be modelled and piloted before being implemented, as this may result in a further lack of trust and confidence in the criminal justice system.
The idea that jury trials are to blame for the crisis is a misconception. In reality, the real problems lie in the inefficiencies of the existing system. By addressing these issues first, the government can begin to build trust and confidence in its justice system once again.
So there's this new court that's supposed to fix Britain's justice system but it's just a bunch of mumbo jumbo 
. I mean, an intermediary court? It sounds like something out of a spy novel 
. And the government is all like "oh no, we'll solve the problem by 2029" 
, but honestly, I'm not buying it 
. The Bar Council thinks the CCBD should be tested first before being rolled out, because that's just common sense 
.
, and the courtrooms that are sitting empty like a ghost town 
. Can't we focus on fixing those issues instead of throwing more courts at the problem? It's like trying to fix a leaky faucet with a new pipe 
. At least then you can see where the water is coming from 
.
!
can someone explain it in simple terms pls? i mean i know they want to reduce the backlog of cases but 80,000 is crazy! how do you even keep track of that many cases?! 
anyway i'm all for fixing the existing system instead of making new rules... that just sounds like more trouble 
. I mean, 80k cases is a big backlog but can't they just sort out the courts in London first? 
. what's the hurry on this thing tho? it sounds like they're just tryin to make headlines 
.
what if we just focused on fixing the stuff that's really broken in the first place? like, have you seen those empty courtooms? wouldn't it be easier to fix that before bringing in a whole new system? 
! Empty for hours on end while prisoners are waiting for their cases... it's just not right. And don't even get me started on resources - courts are struggling to cope with demand, and the system is breaking down 
that's just going to add more complexity to an already clogged system... let's focus on fixing the problems we know exist first, not throwing more cash at it 