header-logo header-logo

07 September 2020
Issue: 7901 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Locked up without trial

Plans to increase custody time limits from 182 to 238 days have prompted alarm among legal professionals

Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland unveiled the proposed two-month extension this week, as part of a package of measures to address the backlog of cases. It will apply to persons accused of offences due to be heard in the Crown court, is expected to come into force on 28 September and will remain in place for nine months.

However, legal rights group Justice hit back with a stern rebuke, pointing out that time limits can already be extended on an individual basis due to illness, absence, the need for separate trials or some other good reason, and that a Coronavirus Crisis Protocol for the Effective Handling of Custody time Limit Cases has been in place since April, with judges and prosecutors deciding each case on an individual basis.

Justice said, in a statement, that it was ‘therefore extremely concerned that this measure will create a blanket extension of detention for all those remanded in custody, irrespective of their circumstances.

‘The right to liberty is protected by Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This requires the question of whether continued detention is justified or necessary to be decided on the circumstances of each individual case.’

Justice suggested, instead, that fully remote jury trials be used, where all participants join via video, jurors joining together in a socially distanced hub, and with the hearing livestreamed to a virtual public gallery. It said it had tested this option and found it fair.

Justice director Andrea Coomber said extending time limits sent a message ‘government is not prioritising the administration of justice during this crisis’. 

Amanda Pinto QC, Chair of the Bar Council said: ‘We are very concerned that this 25% increase in the lawful detention of a potentially innocent person because there aren’t enough courts available to hear their trial does not become a license to push off cases for longer than absolutely necessary.’

Jury trials resumed in May but have been vastly reduced due to social distancing requirements. So far, ten temporary Nightingale courts have opened. 

Issue: 7901 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll