Single justice procedure

Last updated

The single justice procedure (SJP) was introduced by the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 in England and Wales. [1] Under this procedure a single magistrate (a volunteer from the local community), with a legally qualified adviser, can try minor non-imprisonable offences without a court hearing, unless the defendant chooses to attend a hearing in court.

Contents

Procedure

Under this procedure a single magistrate, supported by a legally qualified adviser, tries adult, summary-only, non-imprisonable and victimless offences, including company prosecutions without a court hearing, if the defendant has either pleaded guilty, or not responded to notification of prosecution. The defendant can instead choose to attend a hearing in court. [2] [3] The government states that the procedure is designed to be an accessible, speedy, effective and more efficient means of delivering justice when dealing with the most minor summary offences, [4] but it has been criticised.

Scope

Typical offences dealt with via this means include minor road traffic offences such as speeding and driving without insurance, TV licence evasion and similar matters. [4] Defendants receive notice of the charge by post, including a statement setting out the facts of the offence, and guidance about what next steps to take, including their rights to legal representation. They have the option to plead guilty by post, online or to ask for a court hearing in person. If a defendant pleads "not guilty" their case will be transferred out of the single justice procedure process, and listed for a in-person court hearing in the usual manner. Those pleading guilty, or those who do not respond to the initial notice within 21 days, will have their cases dealt with by a single justice of the peace based on the submitted paperwork alone, without either the prosecutor or defendant being present in person. [4] [1]

Approximately 535000 cases were heard in magistrates' courts in England and Wales via this procedure in 2020. [4] The prosecution (typically the Crown Prosecution Service) must prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, and their written case must satisfy exactly the same rules as would be expected in open court. [1]

According to HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), "Between 1 April 2019 and 30 September 2023, 3,102,392 criminal cases were received into the Single Justice Service, which includes 609,164 receipts through the reformed digital service". [2]

Advantages and criticisms of the single justice procedure

HMCTS argue that the single justice procedure "is not a radical new innovation, but a modification of existing procedures dating from the Magistrates' Court Act 1957". [4] The procedure frees up time for the Crown Prosecution Service and the magistrates' courts to focus on more serious and complex offences, and enables defendants to plead guilty and have their cases heard by a magistrate, without having to go to court. [4] However criticisms have been made that the process is not adequately transparent, with it happening largely behind "closed doors", [5] and some concerns were raised during the Coronavirus pandemic over the dilution of legal advice to magistrates after it had emerged that magistrates were being required to share access to a single legal adviser over the phone or via MS Teams. [6]

HMCTS has published a protocol on sharing court lists, registers and documents with the media, with a section dealing specifically with the SJP. [7] It sets out an approach to circulating lists of pending SJP cases, verdicts (results/register) and sentences, and makes clear that accredited journalists should be provided with the prosecution statement of facts and exhibits, and any defence representations in mitigation, subject to judicial restrictions that may prohibit it, in the same way as for any magistrates' court hearing. Members of the general public must apply for judicial adjudication if they request this information. [7]

The Magistrates' Association says that the SJP needs reform "if it is to be seen as fair and transparent", citing flaws in the way it operates that can "harm … some of society's most vulnerable people". Proposed improvements to the system as implemented as of 2024 include requiring all defendants' pleas and mitigations to be heard by prosecutors before the hearing, and elimination of the effect of time pressure on decisions. [3]

Related Research Articles

The insanity defense, also known as the mental disorder defense, is an affirmative defense by excuse in a criminal case, arguing that the defendant is not responsible for their actions due to a psychiatric disease at the time of the criminal act. This is contrasted with an excuse of provocation, in which the defendant is responsible, but the responsibility is lessened due to a temporary mental state. It is also contrasted with the justification of self defense or with the mitigation of imperfect self-defense. The insanity defense is also contrasted with a finding that a defendant cannot stand trial in a criminal case because a mental disease prevents them from effectively assisting counsel, from a civil finding in trusts and estates where a will is nullified because it was made when a mental disorder prevented a testator from recognizing the natural objects of their bounty, and from involuntary civil commitment to a mental institution, when anyone is found to be gravely disabled or to be a danger to themself or to others.

A plea bargain is an agreement in criminal law proceedings, whereby the prosecutor provides a concession to the defendant in exchange for a plea of guilt or nolo contendere. This may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to a less serious charge, or to one of the several charges, in return for the dismissal of other charges; or it may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to the original criminal charge in return for a more lenient sentence.

The Courts of England and Wales, supported administratively by His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service, are the civil and criminal courts responsible for the administration of justice in England and Wales.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crown Prosecution Service</span> Principal public agency for conducting criminal prosecutions in England and Wales

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is the principal public agency for conducting criminal prosecutions in England and Wales. It is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crown Court</span> Court of first instance of England and Wales

The Crown Court is the criminal court of first instance in England and Wales responsible for hearing all indictable offences, some either way offences and appeals of the decisions of magistrates' courts. It is one of three Senior Courts of England and Wales.

A hybrid offence, dual offence, Crown option offence, dual procedure offence, offence triable either way, or wobbler is one of the special class offences in the common law jurisdictions where the case may be prosecuted either summarily or on indictment. In the United States, an alternative misdemeanor/felony offense lists both county jail and state prison as possible punishment, for example, theft. Similarly, a wobblette is a crime that can be charged either as a misdemeanor or an infraction, for example, in California, violating COVID-19 safety precautions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Magistrates' court (England and Wales)</span> Lower court in England and Wales

In England and Wales, a magistrates' court is a lower court which hears matters relating to summary offences and some triable either-way matters. Some civil law issues are also decided here, notably family proceedings. In 2010, there were 320 magistrates' courts in England and Wales; by 2020, a decade later, 164 of those had closed. The jurisdiction of magistrates' courts and rules governing them are set out in the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

Summary jurisdiction, in the widest sense of the phrase, in English law includes the power asserted by courts of record to deal brevi manu with contempts of court without the intervention of a jury. Probably the power was originally exercisable only when the fact was notorious, i.e. done in presence of the court. But it has long been exercised as to extra curial contempts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Committal procedure</span> Replacement of earlier grand jury process except in US

In law, a committal procedure is the process by which a defendant is charged with a serious offence under the criminal justice systems of all common law jurisdictions except the United States. The committal procedure replaces the earlier grand jury process.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Israel</span> Part of the article of the series of government of Israel

The judicial system of Israel consists of secular courts and religious courts. The law courts constitute a separate and independent unit of Israel's Ministry of Justice. The system is headed by the President of the Supreme Court and the Minister of Justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">High Court of Singapore</span> Lower division of national supreme court

The High Court of Singapore is the lower division of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the upper division being the Court of Appeal. The High Court consists of the chief justice and the judges of the High Court. Judicial Commissioners are often appointed to assist with the Court's caseload. There are two specialist commercial courts, the Admiralty Court and the Intellectual Property Court, and a number of judges are designated to hear arbitration-related matters. In 2015, the Singapore International Commercial Court was established as part of the Supreme Court of Singapore, and is a division of the High Court. The other divisions of the high court are the General Division, the Appellate Division, and the Family Division. The seat of the High Court is the Supreme Court Building.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is a wide-ranging measure introduced to modernise many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Large portions of the act were repealed and replaced by the Sentencing Act 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Magistrates Court of South Australia</span> Lowest level court in South Australia

The Magistrates Court of South Australia is the lowest level court in the state of South Australia. The Magistrates Court, then known as the Court of Petty Sessions, was established in 1837, by the Court of Sessions Act 1837. It has both original and appellate jurisdiction and hears matters specified in the Magistrates Court Act 1991 (SA).

In the law of England and Wales, fitness to plead is the capacity of a defendant in criminal proceedings to comprehend the course of those proceedings. The concept of fitness to plead also applies in Scots and Irish law. Its United States equivalent is competence to stand trial.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Juries in England and Wales</span> Law of trial by jury in England and Wales

In the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales, there is a long tradition of jury trial that has evolved over centuries. Under present-day practice, juries are generally summoned for criminal trials in the Crown Court where the offence is an indictable offence or an offence triable either way. All common law civil cases were tried by jury until the introduction of juryless trials in the new county courts in 1846, and thereafter the use of juries in civil cases steadily declined. Liability to be called upon for jury service is covered by the Juries Act 1974.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military courts of the United Kingdom</span>

The military courts of the United Kingdom are governed by the Armed Forces Act 2006. The system set up under the Act applies to all three armed services: the Royal Navy (RN), the British Army, and the Royal Air Force (RAF), and replaces the three parallel systems that were previously in existence.

Following the common law system introduced into Hong Kong when it became a Crown colony, Hong Kong's criminal procedural law and the underlying principles are very similar to the one in the UK. Like other common law jurisdictions, Hong Kong follows the principle of presumption of innocence. This principle penetrates the whole system of Hong Kong's criminal procedure and criminal law. Viscount Sankey once described this principle as a 'golden thread'. Therefore, knowing this principle is vital for understanding the criminal procedures practised in Hong Kong.

A legal adviser, formerly referred to as a justices' clerk or clerk to the justices is an official of the magistrates' court in England and Wales whose primary role is to provide legal advice to justices of the peace.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Magistrate (England and Wales)</span> Legal office held by lay people in England and Wales

In England and Wales, magistrates are trained volunteers, selected from the local community, who deal with a wide range of criminal and civil proceedings. They are also known as Justices of the Peace. In the adult criminal court, magistrates decide on offences which carry up to twelve months in prison, or an unlimited fine. Magistrates also sit in the family court where they help resolve disputes that involve children, and in the youth court which deals with criminal matters involving young people aged 10-17. Established over 650 years ago, the magistracy is a key part of the judiciary of England and Wales, and it is a role underpinned by the principles of 'local justice' and 'justice by one's peers'.

Bail in the United Kingdom is the practice of releasing individuals from remand subject to certain conditions which are designed to enable criminal justice outcomes, primarily trials and police investigations, to be completed efficiently and effectively. The right to bail is guaranteed in a wide range of contexts but is not absolute. The legal systems of England and Wales, Northern Ireland and of Scotland each deal with bail in similar but distinct ways. Bail can be granted by the courts, the police and certain other criminal justice authorities including the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

References

  1. 1 2 3 "Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015". Legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 18 February 2023.
  2. 1 2 "Fact sheet: Single Justice Service". HM Courts and Tribunals Service, GOV.UK. 7 March 2024.
  3. 1 2 Hall, Rachel; Kersley, Andrew (15 April 2024). "'She wants to go to school': parents of unwell child fear truancy prosecution". The Guardian.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Jones, Siân (26 October 2021). "Explaining the Single Justice Procedure in the magistrates' court". Inside HMCTS (blog). HM Courts & Tribunals Service, Ministry of Justice.
  5. ↑ Kirk, Tristan (2022-11-14). "Secret courts: apology over 1,000 cases held behind closed doors". Evening Standard. Retrieved 2023-02-18.
  6. ↑ "Cutback in magistrates' legal advice 'to hit justice'". uk.movies.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2023-02-18.
  7. 1 2 "Protocol on sharing court lists, registers and documents with the media (accessible version)". HMCTS, GOV.UK. 6 March 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.