Burnham scraps Starmer-era plan to curb jury trials after legal backlash
The Justice Secretary said he had “heard the strength of feeling” against judge-only trials for less serious cases, as the Government refocuses the Courts and Tribunals Bill on magistrates’ powers and a record 81,000-case backlog.
The Government has abandoned controversial plans to curb trial by jury for less serious criminal cases, announcing on Sunday that the historic right would be preserved after sustained opposition from lawyers, judges and MPs.
The proposals, drawn up under Sir Keir Starmer’s premiership and put forward by his justice secretary David Lammy, would have seen defendants facing likely jail terms of under three years tried by a judge alone in the Crown Court rather than by a jury. Justice Secretary Alex Norris said he had “heard the strength of feeling on the proposals for increasing the number of judge-alone trials in the Crown Court and have made the decision to change course”.
The decision by Andy Burnham, who became Prime Minister in July, marks a significant break with his predecessor’s agenda and heads off a backbench rebellion led by the Labour MP Karl Turner. Turner welcomed what he called the rightly binned, unworkable plans, but added: “This is an important step, but the fight to protect access to justice and ensure justice is properly served for both victims and the accused does not end here.”
I have heard the strength of feeling on the proposals for increasing the number of judge-alone trials in the Crown Court and have made the decision to change course.Alex Norris, Justice Secretary, 4 October 2026
The Criminal Bar Association welcomed the move. Its chair, Andrew Thomas, thanked the Government for “listening to the evidence and reaching the right verdict”, though he warned “a severe threat to our trial by jury remains”. The Bar Council’s chair, Kirsty Brimelow, said giving magistrates greater powers when the backlog in magistrates’ courts is increasing could be counterproductive.
The retreat comes against a criminal justice crisis. The backlog of cases awaiting trial in the Crown Courts of England and Wales stood at nearly 81,000 at the end of June, almost double the figure in 2020, and almost a third of those cases had been waiting a year or longer. Hundreds of prisoners have meanwhile been released early to stop prisons becoming full.
What survives of the reforms will be carried by the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which returns to the House of Commons on 13 October. Magistrates’ sentencing powers will still rise from 12 months to two years, and courts rather than defendants will have the final say on where borderline “either-way” cases are heard, removing the right to elect a Crown Court jury trial. Technical and lengthy fraud and financial offences will still be allowed to be heard by a judge alone, though a government-commissioned review this year had rejected the idea.
Lawyers warned the remaining measures still pile pressure on an overstretched lower tier. The wait for a magistrates’ trial has risen by 24 per cent over the past year to an average of almost six months, according to analysis of official data by the Institute for Government, and the Government’s own impact assessment suggests magistrates would hear about 25,000 more cases a year, of which 5,500 would be trials. Ministers have announced a recruitment drive to raise magistrate numbers from about 15,000 to 21,000 within three years.
The Government will also make a statutory commitment to consider any impacts of the structural reforms on ethnic minorities and people of different backgrounds, led by an independent reviewer. Sarah Sackman KC, the minister for courts and legal services, said: “Justice delayed is justice denied. We must take action to bring down the backlog using every lever we have.”
None to date. The Journal corrects errors promptly and transparently. Read our corrections policy.
