Monday Message 15.09.
Monday Message
This has been the year for reviews, and it goes without saying that the next two years will be critical for our profession. At the start of this term, we have several aims and objectives that we hope to progress in the months to come. Responding to the government’s decisions on the Leveson Review, engaging with Sir Brian Leveson’s Part 2 investigations into efficacy, and assisting with the implementation of Harriet Harman’s recommendations will be paramount, as will continuing to fight for better fees, and better working environments.
However, we also want to remember that while this profession often requires great sacrifice, it can also bring with it moments of great privilege, and immense personal and professional satisfaction.
For our profession to survive, we need to remember that it is the Junior Bar who will carry it forward. Therefore, recruitment, retention, student engagement, and making this a better profession for them to inherit is essential work for us all. It is up to those of us who are in positions of seniority and leadership to set the tone, to look out for those more junior, to call out bullying and harassment when we see it, and to remember that we have both an opportunity and a responsibility to change poor working practices of the past.
The Criminal Bar’s future lies in its junior members. We wish the best of luck to all those who are this week starting their pupillages and applying for tenancy. We need to take care of them, encourage them, and remind them that it is worth keeping this profession alive. .
To do that, the CBA is committed to continuing to develop relationships with the government, the judiciary, the courts, the CPS, and all stakeholders, as we plan for the repair of the criminal justice system. We wish to work closely with the Bar Council and the Circuits, remembering that the Criminal Bar is widespread across the country. And we hope to encourage all to remember that courtesy, kindness, and respect are not signs of weakness but signs of our mutual strength.
Respect
Respect is an essential value. In an adversarial system that is under considerable pressure, it will be respect and courtesy that bind us together, particularly in this critical time. Our aim is a system that works fairly not only for victims of crime, and the rights of the accused, but also for the criminal barristers relied upon to prosecute and defend cases of all levels of seriousness and complexity.
We respect and recognise that the judiciary, are also hard-pressed. Together we uphold this public criminal justice system, keeping it open and fair to all regardless of background or means. Like us, our judges daily deal with case management, inadequate court buildings and systems, while balancing legal minefields, and helping juries assess evidence so that they can make the difficult decisions on guilt or innocence in criminal cases.
As we go forward, we call for respect for the evidence, and constructive suggestions that the CBA have made, and will continue to make as to how to better plan the repair work, how to make the courts run more smoothly and effectively. We work in them every day. We know what works and what does not. We need to be listened to.
Targets
For over a year the current Government administration has focused on what it terms swift justice for all those facing criminal charges and the associated victims of crime, within an overarching joint policy ambition shared by the Home Office and Ministry of Justice of halving violence towards women and girls. The Criminal Bar continues to play its part in supporting those ambitions. The CBA reminds those who plan and fund the wider criminal justice system that without targets to reduce the time from point of charge to the commencement of a trial in the Crown Court, the time spent waiting for justice to begin let alone conclude will continue to slip.
Up until 2019, the target of starting a trial in the Crown Court within six months of charge for those defendants on remand and 12 months for those on bail, was regularly met, except in the most complex of cases. To resurrect that aim would focus MOJ and Treasury planning – with or without any Leveson Review – on meeting the statutory custody time limit which limits a defendant’s time in prison without trial to six months from first appearance in Court.
Most courts throughout England and Wales have struggled to meet those CTLs for the past three years and now many remand cases wait a year or more for their trial to start, while bail cases routinely have to wait between two and up to four years – even longer in some London courts.
In February 2021 the Criminal Bar gave evidence to the House of Commons Justice Select Committee, recommending that time targets for trials should be included, a recommendation adopted by the committee in its 27th April 2022 court capacity report. The then Government response on 7th July 2022 can be read in full here.
But of note, is Recommendation 8, which recommended that the Government should set itself targets to improve timeliness across the criminal justice system, and should also set timeliness targets for the average time taken from offence recorded to ultimate conclusion for specific offences, such as rape (Paragraph 52).
The Response was that the department had previously worked with the judiciary to consider reasonable expectations for case completion times in the Crown Court. This resulted in the development of Better Case Management (BCM) framework, in 2016, which the department said “remain a reasonable expectation.”
Regrettably that “reasonable expectation” from over three years ago has been missed consistently since. Timeliness for sexual offence cases in particular have extended and lengthened under this administration. Analysis of the latest MOJ data shows that the mean average time for bailed adult rape cases between charge and trial conclusion for cases concluding between January and March 2025 was 562 days. For bailed adult rape trials concluding between October and December 2019 the mean average time from charge to completion was 347 days.
This month, September 2025, trial dates are being set by several courts for over four years away from date of charge.
This is simply not acceptable, nor sustainable.
The Sentencing Bill
In last week’s Monday Message, we said that we would say more on the Sentencing Bill.
Much of the Bill gives effect to the key recommendations of the Gauke review. We commend its constructive and progressive approach to find solutions to the challenges faced by the CJS, and by our overstretched prisons and probation service. However, the Bill includes one proposal which requires greater scrutiny.
The suggestion that a power to ‘veto’ the decisions of the Sentencing Council should rest in the hands of the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice, has rightly caused a flurry of concern amongst those who work in the criminal courts.
On 10th September the Times published an article by Jonathan Ames dealing with the question of “Political Overreach”, in which he quoted our Chair Riel Karmy-Jones KC as saying:
“There are many recommendations in the Sentencing Bill that we welcome. Although at first sight it seems sensible, when considered more closely, the proposal that there should be an ultimate power to veto any new rules issued by the Sentencing Council has caused our membership some concern. The proposal itself might not be problematic if the veto rested solely with the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice; that would simply be a sensible practical safeguard, allowing our jurisdiction’s two most senior legal officers the power to ensure that the Council does not stray from its remit as intended by Parliament when it was set up. However, the role of Lord Chancellor does not stand alone; that office for the past 25 years has doubled up with the cabinet appointment of Secretary of State for Justice, and it is the political demands on that ministerial office which may, regardless of how many safeguards are written into legislation to prevent misuse, leave the impression that the Council has become independent in name only.
The danger here lies in the fact there may be both the perception of political interference, and the potential for actual interference into the important work of the Sentencing Council by whatever executive may be in power at the time.”
Section 28 – JSC Review
We recommend members reading in full a transcript of the oral evidence given to the current House of Commons Justice Select Committee chaired by Andy Slaughter MP,
We are grateful to Kama Melly KC, Chair of our CBS RASSO committee who gave oral evidence to the House of Commons Justice Select Committee on the efficacy of Section 28 last Tuesday, 9th September. Kama presented alongside a range of Government and related justice stakeholder experts.
As Kama explained, the idea that a complainant in a case involving sexual violence who has provided pre-recorded evidence is thereby dealt with more swiftly is a fallacy. Witnesses who provide pre-recorded evidence remain part of the court process until a case concludes. Most do not feel released from the process until the verdict is reached, and matters often arise that require the complainant to assist when circumstances change, even up until the sentencing is complete. To her knowledge, a number of witnesses in sexual offence cases contemplate withdrawing their s.28 evidence because of the distress they are experiencing waiting for their trial to begin and be over.
You can read that transcript and copies of written evidence provided to the Committee here.
New Justice Ministers
We welcome Baroness Alison Levitt KC and Jake Richards MP, who have joined the ministerial team at the Ministry of Justice as Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State.
Alison has wide experience of the criminal justice system. She practised for many years as a criminal barrister and silk, and is a former Secretary of the CBA. She has also served as the Principal Legal Advisor to the DPP, then in private practice with Mishcon de Reya and more recently as a Circuit Judge.
Jake is the MP for Rother Valley and is a practising barrister at Deka Chambers in London.
The CBA looks forward to working with the new ministerial team. The new Deputy Prime Minister, Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, David Lammy, has served for over 25 years as the local MP for the Tottenham, since first being elected there in June 2000. From 2016 to 2017 he led an independent review into treatment and outcomes of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) people in the criminal justice system [The Lammy Review].
One of Mr. Lammy’s first tasks as Secretary of State will be to oversee the Government’s response to the first part of the independent review of the Criminal Courts published in early July by its Chair, Sir Brian Leveson KC.
In Chapter 4 “The Courts”, the Lammy Review concluded: “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.”
We look forward to working collaboratively with the government on this issue, and remind the Government of our responses to the Leveson Review which can be found here.
House of Lords Select Committee Inquiry on Police Transcription
On 17th September, at 11am, Sam Skinner KC (The 36 Group) will represent the CBA to give oral evidence alongside Harpreet Sandhu KC (No. 5, Leader of the Midland Circuit) to the House of Lords Select Committee Inquiry on Police Transcription. The inquiry will focus on how transcripts are produced, the training and guidance to services that produce transcripts, the standards and quality assurance of transcripts, and their use within court. You can watch it live here
“Kindness at the Bar” – A Report
With the Harman Review very much at the forefront of all our minds, last week saw the publication of a report commissioned by the South Eastern Circuit and Red Lion Chambers into the wellbeing of those working at the Bar which presents in-depth insights and reflections from barristers, Higher Court advocates, and members of the judiciary. Drafted by Professor Robin Banerjee and Dr. Claire Durrant, both of Sussex University, with Valerie Charbit of Red Lion Chambers and Nicola Shannon KC of Furnival Chambers, the report offers in-depth insights and reflections from barristers, Higher Court Advocates, and members of the judiciary. It has been endorsed by the leaders of all the Circuits.
The report rightly concludes that “the cultivation of kindness is not about promoting softness or weakness, but is quite the opposite, and lies at the heart of our professional success. It remains for us, and particularly for those of us in positions of influence and leadership, to heed the words of our colleagues in this report, and translate these mechanisms into practice in order to safeguard the wellbeing of all who work at the Bar”.
We recommend that you read the full report which can be found here.
The discussion at the launch was extremely informative. The video recording will be provided when available.
Parent Working Group
This week sees the launch of the CBA’s working group for improving conditions at the Bar for parents, set up by our Assistant Secretary Matilda Robinson-Murphy. This group’s focus will be to improve conditions for parents returning to the Bar after maternity or paternity leave, creating a support network and improving retention.
The first session will be on 18th September at 2 King’s Bench Walk.
To find out more, please contact [email protected].
Young Bar Day
We’re excited to announce that the first CBA Young Bar Day will take place on Saturday 11th October 2025 at the Inner Temple. Do sign up – the event is available to all self-employed and employed barristers up to 7 years call and would not have been possible without our Young Bar Committee and our modest administrator.
This year’s theme focuses on oral advocacy, with practical sessions covering: Do’s and Don’ts of Cross-Examination and The Art of a Great Jury Speech, along with other important topics. We are honoured that Lady Justice Whipple will deliver the keynote address, setting the tone for a day of insight and inspiration. Our stellar faculty includes: Mrs Justice Maura McGowan, HHJ Noel Lucas, HHJ Rosa Dean and HHJ Emma Nott, Ben Aina KC, Sarah Clarke KC, Sam Skinner KC, Claire Davies KC, Heidi Stonecliffe KC, and Thom Dyke.
We are incredibly grateful to them – and to the Kalisher Trust – for their support in making this event possible. It promises to be a fantastic day of learning, networking, and advocacy skills development for the Young Bar.
For further information and to sign up, contact [email protected]
Perspective from the Junior Criminal Bar
The pressure on our junior practitioners is immense, but the human rewards can generate great professional pride. Here two junior criminal barristers offer a snapshot of how our care over case preparation from dawn and often late into the night can make a difference to ordinary people’s lives.
Alex Benn, Red Lion Chambers, with Abigail Robinson, Drystone Chambers
“Abby and I were appearing on behalf of two young defendants in Cambridge Crown Court. It was one of those days: a hearing that started late, difficult circumstances in the case, breaches of previous orders of the court, and a significant risk of custody. But it seemed like a hearing in which advocacy could really make a difference.
The court sat until well after the usual 4.30 pm clearing out time. (We may have to work well into the night but courts are already at capacity within their working hours) Sensing that the judge needed some persuading, Abby and I spent much longer than either of us had anticipated making submissions on sentence and in mitigation. I certainly felt impressed listening to her submissions, and in turn, they helped me to put all my effort into mine.
In his sentencing remarks afterward, the judge took the time to identify how our advocacy had mattered. Despite his stated inclination to send the defendants into custody given the serious facts of the case, the judge told us that he had been persuaded by the mitigation to take a non-custodial route. After the hearing, popping back into court without his wig or gown to pick up something he had left on the bench, the judge made sure to praise the advocacy and thank us for our work.
That’s a good example of this career: often high-pressured, yes, and with days where you end up in court much later than you expected, but nonetheless of great value. Although Abby and I were tired and the case had been a tricky one, the hearing and the judge’s generosity meant that we both came away reminded why we chose this profession and why, especially in difficult cases, it is so worthwhile.
We have a job to do but for the public it is so much more. That’s why we all care.”
Finally…
Thanks to the Cambridge and Peterborough Bar Mess for their kind invitation to join their annual Bar Mess dinner at Christs College, Cambridge last Friday. Organised by Azza Brown and Abigail Robinson, Leader and Junior of Mess, it was a lovely evening, and wonderful to see pupils and juniors chatting and laughing with silks and judges, sharing stories of their days in court, discussing problems they had had. These days, where we are in chambers less and less, and work more and more on line, such opportunities for collegiality are special.
We need more of them.
Riel Karmy-Jones KC – Chair
Andrew Thomas KC – Vice Chair