Justice Secretary Alex Norris predicts court backlog will decrease despite jury trial plan scrapping

Justice Secretary Alex Norris told the BBC on Sunday that the court backlog in England and Wales will start to fall even though the government has abandoned plans to introduce judge‑only trials for offences carrying sentences under three years. The decision follows Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s move to scrap the proposal that would have let judges decide such cases without a jury.

The jury‑trial reform was first announced by former justice secretary David Lammy in December after a major review of the court system recommended sweeping changes. The review argued that cutting jury trials could speed up proceedings and ease the record backlog that has swelled to almost 81,000 cases. Cuts to legal aid before the pandemic and court closures during lockdowns pushed the numbers higher, prompting the government to promise unlimited funding for more judges to sit in under‑used courts.

Norris said the backlog would begin to shrink “in this Parliament” and that the decline would be “significant over the next decade” as a result of the reforms that remain on the agenda. The Ministry of Justice clarified that only complex fraud and financial offences would be tried without a jury, while thousands of mid‑level crimes would continue to be heard by volunteer magistrates. The Conservative Party hailed the reversal as a “major victory” for defenders of jury trials. Criminal lawyers welcomed keeping juries for most cases but warned that removing a defendant’s right to request a jury could push about 25,000 cases a year into magistrates’ courts, increasing pressure on that system.

The next steps involve implementing the remaining reforms, such as expanding the magistrates’ bench and hiring more judges to clear the existing docket. If the backlog does fall as promised, it could reduce delays for victims and defendants and ease pressure on prisons, which have been swollen by long pre‑trial detentions. Critics say the shift to more magistrate‑only hearings still risks compromising the fairness of trials for many defendants, a debate that will likely shape future justice policy.