‘Blitz’ courts, AI transcription and prison vans in bus lanes among Deputy PM’s sweeping reforms
The Justice Secretary has a plan to drag the criminal court system into the 21st century, and it involves a lot of artificial intelligence (AI).
Speaking at the Microsoft AI Tour in London this week, Deputy PM David Lammy laid out his vision for a faster, fairer justice system, taking aim at a backlog he said had left victims waiting years for justice and a court system he described as “on the point of collapse” when Labour came to power.
Recalling a recent visit to the Ontario Court of Justice in Toronto, Lammy described a courthouse that was “digital by design” and “purposefully paperless”, adding that walking through it he felt less like a visitor from another country and more like one from another time. “A vision of justice,” he said, “designed for the world as it is, not as it once was.”
On the technology side, the government plans to dramatically expand the use of AI across the courts, using it to transcribe hearings, anonymise material and summarise judgments. There will also be a new AI-assisted listing tool to replace the pen-and-paper scheduling system that still overseas when cases are heard, something Sir Brian Leveson had called for in his independent review of the criminal courts.
Lammy also confirmed the government is pressing ahead with a National Listing Framework, which will standardise how cases are scheduled across courts in England and Wales. For anyone who has followed the criminal justice debate closely, this is an attempt to end the so-called ‘postcode lottery’ that has long frustrated victims, particularly those waiting for serious cases like rape and sexual offences to be heard.
Then there are the ‘Blitz’ courts, where similar cases are bundled together and heard over a concentrated period, with the aim of securing earlier guilty pleas and avoiding the all-too-common last-minute collapse. From April, these courts in London will focus specifically on assaults on emergency workers, clearing cases that have been sitting in the system for years.
Rounding out the package are plans to expand case coordinators to all Crown Court centres, film more judges during sentencing to improve transparency, roll out more video hearings, and, in perhaps the most niche announcement of the day, work with local authorities to let prisoner vans use bus lanes.
The speech came alongside a funding announcement confirming criminal courts will be funded at their highest ever level next year, with no cap on Crown Court sitting days. For the first time, funding commitments have been locked in across a three-year period, giving the justice system what Lammy says is some much-needed long-term certainty.
Wrapping up, Lammy declared the government was “calling time” on the current system and promised to deliver “swifter outcomes that victims should be able to expect and have always deserved.”
I’m a right winger but hard to disagree with any of this; kudos to Labour for these easy wins ignored completely by the conservatives. Pragmatic government FTW.
I trust you won’t be voting Reform, then.
“…no cap on Crown Court sitting days.”
fr fr
Has any government in the last 30 years considered just funding the criminal justice system rather than investigating how much they can chop off of it before it collapses?
Only part I disagree with is “blitz” courts.
I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again.
Up and down the country there are closed and mothballed courts (both Magistrates’ and Crown).
There are also public buildings such as town halls containing perfectly serviceable court rooms that are only used occasionally as function rooms and venues.
These could all be brought back into service for non-custody cases or even non-trial hearings.
Most computer equipment is wireless nowadays so fitting them out shouldn’t be too onerous.
Any criminal barrister or solicitor advocate of at least ten years call could be appointed without further assessment as a temporary recorder to
oversee simple non-trial matters such as PTPH’s, Mentions, Bail Apps, Breaches and non-complex Sentences.
We do not need to throw the baby out with the bath water by getting rid of juries for mid-level cases.
May I also add the following quote from none other than the Lord Chancellor (as he now is) back in 2017?
‘Juries are a success story of our justice system. Rigorous analysis shows that, on average, juries – including all-white juries – do not deliver different results for BAME and White defendants. The lesson is that juries are representative of local populations – and must deliberate as a group, leaving no hiding place for bias or discrimination.’
Lord Mince says something sensible for a change?
Oh yes, and another thing… let’s bump all of those Assault Emergency Worker cases back to the Mags.
Someone who shoves a police officer deserves to be punished, for sure, but sending such cases to the Crown Court is excessive.
Weekend courts are the obvious answer but the problem is involving barristers in the decision making process. They are too self interested and must be omitted to avoid bias.