Jury restriction plan clears first hurdle despite Labour dissent

MPs have voted to allow a bill that would curb access to jury trials in England and Wales to progress to the next stage, despite some Labour MPs stating their opposition to the reforms.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill passed by 304 votes to 203, a majority of 101, with 10 Labour MPs rebelling against the government, and dozens abstaining.

Justice Secretary David Lammy pleaded with Labour MPs to support his changes to jury trials and other reforms that he argued would reduce a record backlog of cases in crown courts.

But the reforms and Lammy himself faced a barrage of criticism in emotional speeches, with one Labour MP saying the experiences of victims of rape had been "weaponised" in the debate.

Labour MP Charlotte Nichols said she was waiving her right to anonymity as a victim of rape.

Nichols, who had not previously spoken in the House of Commons about her experience, told MPs: "I waited 1,088 days to go to court.

"Every single one of those days was agony, made worse by having a role in public life that meant that the mental health consequences of my trauma were played out in public, with the event that led to my eventual sectioning for my own safety still being something that I receive regular social media abuse from strangers about to this day.

"But here's the kicker, in this debate, experiences like mine feel like they've been weaponised and are being used for rhetorical misdirection, for what this bill actually is."

The MP for Warrington North said the man was acquitted in a criminal court but she was given compensation after a civil case found she had been raped.

But in a letter to Lammy, dozens of female Labour MPs urged the government to "remain steadfast in your pursuit of the much-needed reform and modernisation of our justice system" in the bill.

Speaking in the Commons, Labour MP Natalie Fleet, who signed the letter, argued the government was "stepping up for victims".

Fleet, who has previously spoken about her own experience of being groomed and raped, said: "I can tell you from personal experience, you know what's worse than being raped? Facing years of waiting to see if people believe you."

She added: "This is not about denying anybody justice. This is about enabling victims and innocent parties to have a more efficient path to getting that justice."

MPs voted on the overall principles of the measures in the bill during its second reading.

The 10 Labour MPs who voted against the bill were Apsana Begum, Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne, Imran Hussain, Kim Johnson, Ian Lavery, John McDonnell, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Jon Trickett and Nadia Whittome.

There were 90 Labour MPs listed as no vote recorded, which can mean abstention.

The measures, announced in December after a review by a retired judge Sir Brian Leveson, would scrap jury trials in England and Wales for crimes that carry a likely sentence of less than three years.

Volunteer community magistrates, who deal with the majority of all criminal cases, will take on more work.

The changes will also give magistrates the power to hear cases that have a maximum sentencing range of up to 18 months.

A back-up power to allow them to sentence a criminal up to two years will be created, but held in reserve.

Speaking in the Commons as he introduced legalisation to deliver the changes, Lammy, also the deputy prime minister, said they would free up "thousands of hearing days" in the crown courts for more serious cases to be heard.

He added that Labour had inherited a court system system "close to breaking point" after previous cuts to the justice department under the Conservatives, and lengthy waiting times for cases to be heard were a source of "injustice".

He warned that without further action, the current backlog could jump from just under 80,000 cases currently to 200,000 by 2035.

He added: "Victims are currently worn down, people simply give up, cases collapse and offenders remain free. Free to roam the streets, free to commit more crimes, free to create more victims.

"To restore swift and fair justice, we are pulling every lever available, investment is essential, modernisation is essential, and reform."

The fate of the bill rests on Labour MPs and whether enough of them rebel.

One of the rebels, Whittome said the government's law was a "short-termist cost-cutting measure, which will further entrench discrimination and inequality".

"The courts backlog was caused by chronic underfunding of our criminal justice system, not jury trials," she added.

More Labour MPs could have abstained in Tuesday's vote, with more than 40 of them having previously said they are not prepared to support the plans.

Labour MP Karl Turner, a leading opponent of the jury plans, said the bill was "unworkable, unpopular, unjust and unnecessary".

Turner, a former barrister, said he would abstain in the vote after speaking to Lammy on Monday, when he was promised a "meaningful" review period to scrutinise how the reforms are working if approved by Parliament.

Turner said he was confident "the worst parts of this bill" would be defeated at a later stage of its passage through Parliament.

It is not yet clear whether the Labour rebels have the numbers to defeat the government in the weeks to come.

The bill is another stern test of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's ability to get his MPs behind controversial reforms his government believes are essential.

During the debate, Conservative shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy said the government was "rushing" proposed changes to jury trials through Parliament "at breakneck speed"

He said: "The bill was published less than two weeks ago after no consultation at all, and today, the justice secretary is already asking members to approve its second reading."

Liberal Democrat justice spokeswoman Jess Brown-Fuller argued that limiting jury trials "won't shift the dial" on reducing the backlog of cases in the Crown Court.

Brown-Fuller said "trial by jury is not the problem", calling it "one of the only parts of our justice system that is still actually trusted".