A third of all prosecution advocates are ‘lacklustre’ or ‘less than competent’ according to a review carried out by the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate published today.

The inspectors found advocates, both in-house and external counsel, were fully competent in two thirds of cases, but a quarter were lacklustre and 8% were less than competent or poor. Of the 376 advocacy assessments made, none came out as outstanding.

In the Crown court, the review found differences in quality between Crown advocates and external counsel. Overall, external counsel performed better than CPS advocates in trial hearings and across all individual aspects of trial advocacy, apart from the closing speech.

In-house advocates performed better in non-contested hearings, such as plea and case management and sentence hearings.

The standard of CPS and external advocates in the magistrates’ court was generally ‘sound’ in relation to non-trial hearings. But in trial advocacy only half the Crown prosecutors assessed were fully competent, in comparison to two-thirds of external solicitors and barristers.

Chief inspector Stephen Wooler said significant progress had been made by the CPS in improving the quantity of court work undertaken by in-house advocates, but quality had suffered in places.

He recommended that the CPS improve the instructions given to both internal and external advocates and ensure papers are provided in time.

The review found tensions were easing between the CPS and the bar and some members of the judiciary over the greater use of in-house advocates, and a ‘more collaborative and less combative’ approach was beginning to emerge.

Director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer said: ‘The CPS has come a long way in a very short period of time and advocacy is now at a turning point.

‘I agree with the chief inspector that the quality of our advocacy, whether provided by in-house advocates or external counsel, must now be a primary focus.’

He added: ‘The inspectorate recognises the very real progress the CPS has made over the past four years in implementing our strategy to routinely conduct our own high quality advocacy in all courts and across the full range of cases.

‘I intend to continue to develop and deploy suitably qualified in-house advocates to conduct all types of prosecution.’