Monday Message 22.12.25
This week’s message falls into 4 parts.
I. A Seasonal Christmas message
II. “The Dog Ate Our Homework” – what we learned from the DPM David Lammy’s appearance before the JSC last week, warts and all, an excellent summary by our wonderful Vice Chair Andrew Thomas KC;
III. A reminder, with the details of How to Write to your MP
IV. An appeal for the Kalisher Trust’s “pre-loved clothing” fair on 16.2.26
Dear Members,As we come to the end of 2025 and head into this Holiday Season, I want to thank you—genuinely—for the work you have done, the standards you have upheld, and the colleagues you have supported. It has been a year in which the criminal justice system has demanded even more from everyone who serves it. And yet, in courtrooms across England and Wales, members of the Criminal Bar have continued to do what we always do: keep the system honest, keep it humane, keep it fair, and keep it moving.
This year has made one point unmistakable: the challenges we face are not abstract. The Crown Court backlog is at a historic level, with trials repeatedly vacated or adjourned and serious cases waiting far too long to be heard. Court buildings are failing. Court capacity continues to frustrate progress, even while practitioners and judges work flat out. The human cost of delay—on victims, witnesses, defendants, families, and on us who work in the system and keep it from collapse —is the reason the CBA has kept pressing, publicly and privately, for practical measures that will actually increase capacity, improve conditions, and facilitate better day-to-day functioning.
Against that backdrop, the CBA has focused on three things.
First: evidence. We ran and promoted national surveys to ensure the lived reality of practice is captured in data that decision-makers cannot ignore or dismiss. The findings have reinforced what members already know: that the pressures are immense. They are structural, and the administrative burden has become unsustainable. Retention is already failing, and the profession is at risk unless it is properly supported. Importantly, however, the survey work has also highlighted the strength that still exists at the Criminal Bar, the collegiality, mutual support, and pride and purpose that we still have in our work, something worth protecting and building on.
Second: influence. We have remained in regular, constructive engagement with Ministers, the Ministry of Justice, the Legal Aid Agency, the CPS, the Bar Council, Circuit leaders, and senior members of the Judiciary. We have pushed for fair remuneration, and for reforms that are workable in practice. We have continued to contribute to consultations (including on appellate law) and to press for changes that improve the system without undermining fundamental rights.
Third: the rule of law. This year has been dominated by debate about “radical reform”, including proposals that would significantly erode the right to trial by jury. We have engaged directly with Sir Brian Leveson’s review work, and we have been prepared to say—publicly—when proposed “solutions” risk trading away safeguards without any credible evidence they will fix the real causes of delay. Our recent “write to your MP” campaign on jury trial is part of that same message: reform must strengthen justice, not suspend or undermine it.
The CBA has been clear: we oppose the government’s proposals. Efficiency matters, but fairness is not optional.
Alongside these three core aims, we have continued to prioritise professional culture: calling out bullying and harassment, supporting members and chambers to do better, and working with the judiciary to improve relationships and standards of conduct so that people can flourish in this profession, not merely endure it.
And, as I hope you all know, we have worked tirelessly over the last year, and particularly intensely over the past few months to engage the media’s interest, so as to inform and educate both those in politics, and the public about the real issues, and truths behind the government’s proposals. I suspect well over a hundred news articles have been published, alongside the many interviews given, and podcasts produced.
Do not miss our latest episode of Criminal Justice Matters, in which Simon Spence KC and Kate Bex KC discuss the Lammy Proposals with none other than The Secret Barrister. It is excellent, and can be found here.
You might also have seen that 40 Labour MPs that have signed a letter expressing their opposition to the proposals. It can be found here: Dear Prime Minister,” letter from The Labour Party MPs. “The proposals to remove trial by jury for all but the most serious of cases will have an incredibly limited impact while also depriving… | The Criminal Bar Association.
One event has already been held in Parliament. The CBA is grateful to Garden Court Chambers and particularly Mark Gatley KC and Lucie Wibberley for liaising with us over their organisation of “In Defence of Jury Trials” a drop-in briefing session for cross-party MP’s which took place last week.
This work will continue into next year. Working with the Bar Council, amongst other things we have organised 3 public facing engagement to highlight our opposition to the government’s proposals. These will take place in quick succession over a 3-week period starting in January to allow us to maximise momentum on both the political and media / communications sides.
- MP/Peers drop-in session in Parliament. An MP has sponsored a room for the BC/CBA to continue talks about the proposals, and the reasons for our objections to curtailing jury trials. MPs and Peers will be invited to meet myself, Kirsty Brimelow KC, Circuit Leaders, and other members of the Bar.
- Court day in constituencies – We will be asking the Bar to invite their MPs to come to their local court on a specific Friday at the end of January. We will provide a model letter/email text to send and will also be encouraging MPs to come directly, as members of the public.
- MP lobby day with wigs and gowns – This will be a day when we want as many barristers as possible to come to Parliament and lobby their MP.
We will provide further information and details in January.
In addition to this, again working with the Bar Council, we have set up a government petition to encourage people to sign up against the proposals. Once it is live we will share the link. We have appreciated and been grateful for the Change.org petition, but we will be asking you to sign this one as well, because as a government petition, when we reach 10,000 signatures the Government must respond. If we get 100,000 (our aim) it will trigger a debate in Parliament.
My thanks go to everyone who has helped over the past few months: HH Geoffrey Rivlin KC, HH Chris Kinch KC, HH Paul Dodgson have lent their independent experience and well-informed views to the debate; past Chairs of the CBA, Leaders of the Circuits, and so many others have come forward to speak up for Justice. Barbara Mills KC has really fought our corner – I congratulate her on her highly successful year and wish her the very best for everything she has to come. The CBA also welcomes Kirsty Brimelow KC and Heidi Stonecliffe KC in as Chair and Vice Chair of the Bar Council respectively. We are looking forward to working with them both in 2026.
I also want to thank James Rossiter, the CBA communications director who has worked tirelessly on our media work, Andrew Thomas KC, James Gray, Chloe Ashley, Matilda Robinson-Murphy, who provide endless support, and Aaron Dolan who takes care of us all and makes sure that the CBA runs smoothly.
Now for the important bit: The Holiday Season. Whatever your background, whatever your faith, I hope that over the coming days, you get the kind of rest that is more than just “a gap in the diary”. I hope there is time for the people who refill your tank, for food that is unreasonably festive, and for the small, quiet things that make winter feel like a pause rather than a slog. If you are on call, in trial, or otherwise keeping the wheels turning while the rest of the world is eating mince pies, please know you are appreciated—by your colleagues and by this Association.
Thank you for everything you have done this year. We will continue to be your voice—robustly, constructively, and with confidence in the value of what you do.
Finally – I leave you below with Andrew Thomas KC’s excellent summary of What we learned from our Deputy Prime Minister’s appearance before the Justice Select Committee last week, on the 16th of December, aptly entitled “The Dog ate our Homework”.
Amusing and terrifying in equal measures – an essential read.
Best wishes,
Riel
What we learned from David Lammy’s appearance before the Justice Select Committee.On Tuesday 16th December 2025, the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Justice, David Lammy, appeared before the House of Commons Justice Select Committee to answer questions on behalf of the MoJ.
The first half of the session is an important and illuminating discussion about the government’s proposals for reform of the Criminal Justice System. The hearing can be watched here.
We learned the following:
1. Impact of reforms on Trials by Jury
- The government expects that its proposals will cut the proportion of cases being tried by juries by half.
- About 3% of criminal cases currently result in a trial by jury. Of these, Mr Lammy expects that his proposals will have the following outcome:
- 50% of current trials will remain as trial by jury (indictable only cases or likely sentence 3 years or more)
- 25% of current trials will be tried by judge alone (either way cases with sentences of up to 3 years)
- 25% of trials will be reallocated to the Magistrates’ Courts
(either way cases with sentences of up to 18 or possibly 24 months)
- The JSC chair pointed out to Mr Lammy that there is no single document which sets out the details of the MoJ’s proposals, only a collection of different statements and announcements; the government have not even formally responded to Sir Brian Leveson’s first report.
- When asked where we can all go to find out full details of the proposals David Lammy said: “I will reflect on that matter”.
- David Lammy said that the government will publish a Courts Bill in the New Year. The expected timetable is:
- Government’s formal response to Leveson Part 1 to be published ‘in Spring 2026’.
- Courts Bill published ‘in Spring 2026’.
- Legislation to be completed with Royal Assent ‘by the end of 2026’.
- Reforms to be implemented ‘in 2027’.
- David Lammy confirmed that the legislation will not be retrospective.
- The 80,000+ cases currently in the backlog will not be affected or assisted by this change, nor will any of the cases coming into the Crown Court between now and implementation in 2027.
- The current MoJ forecast is that if no action of any kind is taken the backlog will rise from 80,000 cases to 116,000 cases.
- However, everyone agrees that no action is not an option. The MoJ has not disclosed any forecasts for the impact of other options (such as increasing sitting days etc).
- David Lammy told the committee that the MoJ has done some modelling of these proposals, but they will not disclose details. He said that the modelling is still “work in progress”.
- The MoJ’s explanation for not releasing data is that he is awaiting discussions with the Lady Chief Justice on what he calls a “concordat” about the likely implementation which will affect the figures.
- Legal strategists will immediately recognise this as the deployment of the classic “The dog ate my homework” defence. The MoJ insists that it has done some modelling but for reasons outside its control regrettably it is unable to publish it. It is now working on ‘re-writing’ its modelling which will be provided in due course.
- In due course the MoJ will publish two impact assessments at the same time as the Bill, which will consider (a) the economic impact of the proposals and (b) the equalities impact.
- When pressed as to whether the MoJ will release all its modelling, David Lammy replied: “I will do what I deem appropriate for the purposes of ensuring this Bill’s passing.” He said that he knows what sort of impact assessment Parliament will require for the purpose of scrutinising the legislation.
- David Lammy says that his “ambition” is to see the backlog falling “by the end of the next Parliament”.
- Did he mean to say this? If so, that could mean anything up to 2034. If he meant the end of the next Parliamentary session, that probably means either late 2027 or 2028.
- It is a poor ambition either way.
- David Lammy said that the MoJ would have come forward with reforms regardless of the backlog. His view is that there are long-term trends which have made the current system unsustainable. He referred to the fact that the “system” has not been reformed since 1971.
- In other words, the justification for these reforms is not what we all thought it was. Anyone who heard David Lammy tell the Commons that these reforms were necessary to “tackle the emergency in our courts” may have mistakenly thought that the backlog was the rationale for the curtailment of the right to jury trial. In fact, these are long-term strategic reforms.
- We are left to assume that this difference in emphasis has nothing to do with the fact that the MoJ now acknowledges that the current backlog will be unaffected by the changes.
- When an MP asked David Lammy what he was doing about getting more money out of the Treasury, and gave reasons why it was needed, he said “You are making my case for me”.
- In other words, even the Deputy Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor agrees that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is not putting sufficient funds into the criminal justice system.
- David Lammy made it clear that the MoJ recognises that the diminishing pool of qualified lawyers willing to undertake criminal work is a systemic problem. We welcome that.
- Mr Lammy has said several times that this is why he is investing in matched pupillage funding to ensure new recruits to criminal work. In respect of retention, he referred to the £34 million of additional money for legal aid.
- This is not enough.
- David Lammy confirmed that Magistrates Courts will become a Court of Record, with AI generated transcripts of proceedings.
- He said that the MoJ will “look at” providing more legal aid funding to cover the additional work which would be necessary to deal with applications for permission to appeal from the Magistrates’ Court (eg. reading transcripts, preparing detailed grounds).
- This is a major access to justice problem which needs a concrete proposal, not a mere offer to “look at” the issue.
- David Lammy said that his support for juries in his 2017 Report has been “misunderstood” (!!), and both Magistrates and Judges alone are just as capable of being fair.
- So when he said in his report that juries were “a success story of our criminal justice system”, and explained that deliberation by 12 people together produces a fairer result, and when he contrasted the success of juries with evidence that Magistrates’ Courts appear to convict a disproportionate number of BAME defendants, and when he said that Judges seem to sentence a disproportionate number of BAME defendants to prison, he was (apparently) not suggesting that we should have greater confidence in juries to act fairly.
- Having cleared up that misunderstanding, Mr. Lammy may next want to explain why he said in 2020 that ‘Criminal Trials without juries are a bad idea’.
- David Lammy thinks:
- That “it is not axiomatic” that any of his proposals will lead to an increase in the prison population.
- That cases of driving without insurance are currently being tried by juries.(!!)
- That it currently takes up to 3 to 4 years for a case of murder with a knife to come on for trial.
Write to your MPIf you have not already done so, here is all the information you need:
- The Template letter which you can adapt to suit your personal circumstances and experiences can be found here.
- The Briefing Note which you may wish to send with your letter can be found here.
- You can find out who your MP is, and how to contact them by email Find your MP – MPs and Lords – UK Parliament.
- PLEASE do CC in both [email protected], and [email protected] so that we can collectively monitor numbers of letters written.
Kalisher Trust’s pre-loved Clothing SaleOn 16 February 2026 Lincoln’s Inn will host the ‘preloved clothing’ fair in conjunction with the Kalisher Trust. The Fair is an opportunity for students who have other financial pressures and who may be unable to spend large sums on professional clothing to select free of charge up to 5 items, and also apply for a free wig and gown (subject to availability). Volunteers are encouraged to sign up, and clothing donations are welcome!