Edward Fitzgerald criticizes the UK government for proposing major cuts to jury trials across England and Wales
Breaking

Edward Fitzgerald criticizes the UK government for proposing major cuts to jury trials across England and Wales

Sir Keir Starmer is facing criticism from an unexpected source: one of the lawyers who guided him at the start of his legal career.

Edward Fitzgerald KC, a respected human rights barrister, has openly opposed the government’s plan to drastically reduce jury trials, calling it “most unfortunate.”

Fitzgerald, who mentored Starmer at Doughty Street Chambers in the early 1990s, warned that scrapping juries for all but the gravest offences could undermine a cornerstone of the justice system.

What the Government Wants to Change

Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary David Lammy is pressing ahead with sweeping reforms aimed at easing the Crown Court backlog, even in the face of broad opposition.

Under the proposals:

  • Jury trials would be reserved for only the most serious crimes, such as murder, robbery, and rape.

  • “Swift courts” would handle other serious offences without juries.

  • Magistrates could hand down prison sentences of up to 18 months, instead of being limited to one year.

  • Defendants would lose automatic rights of appeal in certain cases.

  • Complex fraud and financial cases would no longer involve juries, avoiding long, drawn-out proceedings.

Ministers argue these measures are essential: by 2028, the Crown Court backlog could reach 100,000 cases.

Critics, however, warn that removing juries would overwhelm judges and strip defendants of the right to be tried by peers.

Fitzgerald Speaks Out

Despite his long-standing friendship with Starmer, Fitzgerald did not hold back.

Speaking to The Telegraph, he said:

“It is most unfortunate the Government has taken this position. Juries should be kept.”

A highly respected barrister, Fitzgerald has a CBE for his human rights work and was one of the few friends invited to welcome Starmer into Downing Street in 2024.

Their professional relationship goes back decades—they even co-authored a book in 2008 on the use of the death penalty where it is still legal.

Wider Legal Community Joins the Criticism

Fitzgerald is far from alone. Doughty Street Chambers, where he and Starmer worked, has publicly condemned the reforms, calling them “wrong in principle” and questioning whether they would actually reduce the court backlog.

The Four Bars—the collective body representing senior lawyers across England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland—also weighed in.

Their joint statement warned:

“There is no evidence that this fundamental change will bring down the existing Crown Court backlog.

The curtailment of jury trials has predictable negative consequences, including undermining the public’s trust and confidence in our criminal justice systems.”

They stressed that jury trials are a key democratic institution, inclusive across age, gender, and ethnicity, and essential to the public’s faith in justice.

Political Pressure Mounts

Starmer is also facing dissent from within his own party.

Last month, 39 Labour MPs signed a letter pledging to vote against the proposals in the Commons, even at the risk of losing the party whip.

Even with the criticism, Fitzgerald emphasized that he remains supportive of Starmer personally:

“I am a great supporter of Mr Starmer.”

Court Backlogs and the Push for Reform

Before the pandemic, court backlogs were falling, but Covid-19 caused a major disruption, slowing trials and increasing delays.

The Ministry of Justice believes its reforms could cut the proportion of cases going to juries from two percent to one percent, allowing faster resolution of less serious offences.

Justice Minister Jake Richards defended the changes, saying they are intended to bring criminals to justice more quickly and reduce the waiting time for victims:

“The most dangerous part of undermining trust in our justice system is that rape victims are waiting five, six years for their day in court, and too often those trials never happen.”

What Comes Next

Legislation for the reforms is still some time away.

Critics, however, are urging the government to reconsider before the changes are written into law.

With dissent coming from lawyers, MPs, and civil liberties groups, Starmer faces a complex balancing act between tackling court delays and preserving the jury system.

Related News

Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn

Partner Contents on TDPel Media