Criminal justice reforms – Exchange Chambers silks comment on Sir Brian Leveson’s proposals

July 10, 2025

Silks from Exchange Chambers have provided their views on potential reforms to the criminal justice system.

Sir Brian Leveson was asked by the Lord Chancellor to come up with a series of proposals to reduce the backlog of cases in the criminal courts.

There are almost 77,000 cases waiting for trial in the Crown Court in England and Wales – meaning some defendants and victims are waiting years for justice.

After reviewing the state of the criminal courts, Sir Brian suggested “fundamental” reforms to “reduce the risk of total system collapse”.

To fix what he calls a broken system, Sir Brian has suggested having judge-only trials for certain cases such as fraud and bribery.

Another recommendation involves having more out of court resolutions like cautions.

Commenting on the proposals, Benjamin Myers KC said:

“The answer to the backlog in the criminal justice system is simple. It is funding. We are dealing with a system that is chronically underfunded and has been chronically underfunded for very many years. The proposed reforms count for nothing if the funding is not in place to implement them; and this is something identified by Sir Brian Leveson at the outset of his report. But if the funding can be put in place for these reforms, then why not for the current system? If the funding we will need for all the new courts, the new judges and the new lawyers can be provided, then it should be provided now. Then we would not have to contemplate the erosion of the right to trial by jury for serious offences or the unnecessary restriction of many fraud trials and complex cases to judge only. It is important to recognise that the value of jury trial lies in the social and political integrity it brings to proceedings for serious criminal offences. There is no doubting the reach and analysis of Sir Brian Leveson’s report and the value of many of its proposals: but it is premised on the availability of funding that successive governments have refused to provide. And if that funding were provided now, there would be no need to adopt those proposals that may have a constitutional impact beyond apparent savings in cost and time.”

Responding to Sir Brian Leveson’s report, Nick Johnson KC said:

“Our criminal justice system stands at a critical juncture. Chronic delay leads to injustice and should not be underestimated. The true cause of the backlog is underfunding of the system by successive governments over many years. I welcome proper funded efforts to achieve pre-trial and even pre-charge resolutions, such as the wider use of deferred prosecution agreements, which so far have been used far too sparingly and only for corporate defendants.

“However, the jury is still out for me on judge only trials in complex fraud. Skilled judges and barristers already cut through the complexity in such cases so juries can understand the heart of the issues and come to sensible decisions based upon their collective and diverse experience. I await more details of the proposals with interest and hope they are not just driven by a desire to cut cost.”

Providing his thoughts, Mark Rhind KC said:

“Sir Brian Leveson is right to say that the criminal justice system is heading towards systemic collapse – but it should be remembered that this is not because of some inherent problem with the jury system but because it has been deliberately run down for decades.

“Governments of both persuasions have overseen swingeing cuts to fees, a crumbling Court estate, reorganisations of prison services, prisoner transport, interpreter services and probation which have led to massive contracts for private companies but huge inefficiencies and waste. Most recently, before the pandemic, a deliberate decision was made to cut Court sitting days and intentionally maintain a backlog of cases.

“The criminal barristers and solicitors, the people who work within the system day after day and have to deal with these issues, have warned again and again of the risks being taken with a fundamental part of the system and have been repeatedly ignored.

“I can only hope that the Government listen to input from stakeholders before going ahead with radical reforms which remove the rights and protections enjoyed by the people of this country for hundreds of years.

“Again and again studies have shown that the jury system is the fairest aspect of the criminal justice system giving all sectors of society and people from all backgrounds a fair chance and equal treatment.  Watering down those rights and protections should be avoided at all costs.”

Benjamin Myers KC, Nick Johnson KC and Mark Rhind KC all commented in a personal capacity.