As a barrister, I campaigned against the devastating cuts to our justice system under the Conservatives, which left our courts crumbling, our court backlogs growing and parties in legal proceedings let down. But now, as a member of parliament, I see more clearly that spending can only ever be part of the answer. Reforming our procedures and boosting court productivity will be essential to fixing this crisis.
On entering government, further investment was clearly necessary – departmental spend in the Ministry of Justice declined by almost 25% in real terms whilst the Tories were in power with devastating effect. Since last year’s general election, the Labour government has invested £2.5 billion for our courts and tribunals and a further boost of £93 million to legal aid provision. This will not solve all the issues after 14 years of mismanagement, but it is an important acknowledgement of Labour’s commitment to our justice system.
We know, however, that demands on public resources are vast and an ambitious reform agenda is required. This should be embraced by the profession: modernising our justice system can lead to more efficient and expeditious justice.
The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has announced a review led by Sir Brian Leveson into how criminal courts could be reformed to ensure cases are dealt with more productively. The scale and variety of the pressures facing the criminal courts do not need repeating here. It is right that a rigorous consideration of sentencing powers for magistrates’ and the reclassification of offences is undertaken. The prospect of a further intermediate court, between the magistrates’ and crown court, has been mooted – and considering the magnitude of the backlog must be taken seriously.
But the government should not stop there. Harnessing the fast-pace of technological change will be crucial to preparing our justice system for the future.
Lawyers dealing in the hum-drum of the criminal, county or family courts will tell you about the vast inefficiencies and delays caused by a chaotic infrastructure and failing system. Whilst steps were taken during the pandemic to better use technology in our courts, in many areas it has been a case of one step forward and two steps back. There remains an aversion in some courts to online court hearings where appropriate, to ease capacity pressures for those proceedings which require a building. In parliament last week, a colleague from Devon was telling the House about a constituent who was forced to sleep outside the court as it would have cost him so much to travel to and from his home. This is absurd when his case could almost certainly have been dealt with remotely.
The court’s digital infrastructure will need continued investment and consideration. Mechanisms for e-filing and the digital organisation of evidence needs to be all but universal. The government has confirmed they are piloting new technology to automate manual work across government, but the potential for efficiencies are particularly vast in our justice system.
Artificial intelligence can also be transformative. It has the potential to assist in ensuring the decision-maker has all the relevant information and legal arguments concisely before them. Such tools can assist lay people, mitigating the delays caused by litigants-in-person, a particular problem in our family courts.
To take advantage of AI, the government must begin to build the framework to ensure it can be utilised safely. The transparency of AI models must be established and consideration must be given to their potential algorithmic bias. Given the pace of change however, and the potential gains available, these are questions we cannot afford to avoid. In our jurisdiction, a judge has already used ChatGPT to produce a summary of the law, which was included in their judgment.
Technology should not just change the means by which justice is served, but the nature of the service. The success of the Family Drug and Alcohol Courts shows the huge success that can be gleaned from ‘problem-solving’ courts. Technology can allow proceedings to be fast-paced and more bespoke. AI tools can also better facilitate court scrutiny between hearings, for example.
To seek better disposal rates and more expeditious justice is not a criticism of lawyers or the judiciary. Indeed, we know that lawyers across nearly all areas of practice are working harder, often for less money, and are frustrated with a broken system. An agenda focussing on productivity will only help these lawyers and judges who keep this system afloat – and deliver speedier justice for their clients.
Jake Richards is a barrister and Labour MP for Rother Valley
1 Reader's comment