supporting magistrates - official documents

Supporting Magistrates’ Courtsto Provide Justice

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts

to Provide Justice

Presented to Parliamentby the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellorby Command of Her Majesty

November 2005

Cm 6681 £10.00

© Crown Copyright 2005

The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and departmental logos) may bereproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproducedaccurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged asCrown copyright and the title of the document specified.

Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to The Licensing Division, HMSO, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ.Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected]

3

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice

Contents

Foreword 4

Executive summary 5

Introduction: The magistrates’ courts in context 8

1 Communities – Connected 13

2 Courts – Respected 18

3 Courts – Effective 28

4 Recruitment and retention of the magistracy 37

5 Conclusion 47

Foreword by the Secretaryof State and Lord Chancellor

It is difficult to over-estimate the contributionmagistrates’ courts make to their localcommunities. They are a permanent part ofour justice system.

Each and every day they sit, the courts help tomake our communities safer and more secure.They deal with the small minority of people whocommit crime and anti-social behaviour. Theyrespond quickly and effectively to childcare cases.And they help people resolve their disputes asfairly as possible.

Magistrates themselves demonstrate a particularcommitment to public service and to makingtheir communities better and safer places tolive. They show fairness, decisiveness and theability to apply reason and common sense. Incarrying out their duties, magistrates make atremendous contribution to the safety andprosperity of the country.

District judges bring specialist knowledge andexpertise to the magistrates’ courts. And thejustices’ clerks and the court staff help ensurejustice is effectively carried out.

The magistrates’ courts are an important andvalued part of the justice system. I recognise andvalue the work of magistrates and magistrates’courts. I have visited many different courts overthe past twelve months; I have seen for myselfthe contribution they make and the diligencewith which they carry out their duties. I paytribute to them and thank them for their efforts.

But I wanted to know whether we could doeven more to make magistrates’ courts asefficient and effective as possible. This is why,last year, I launched the Supporting Magistratesto Provide Justice programme.

The programme was designed to look athow we could help make improvements to theway magistrates’ courts operate. To find out,we asked the experts: magistrates, districtjudges, justices’ clerks, our administrativestaff and our Criminal Justice System (CJS)partners in the local criminal justice boards.They responded in their thousands.

I am incredibly grateful for these responses.We have looked closely at what people saidand have analysed their comments closely.We have listened to people’s concerns and,wherever we can, have already begun to actupon them, in collaboration with our colleaguesacross the Criminal Justice System.

There are areas where we can – and must –improve. This paper sets out where we will betaking forward further reforms – many of thembased directly on the ideas and suggestionsfrom magistrates, district judges and court staff.This needs to be a platform from which wedeliver simpler, speedier justice for ourcommunities. Cases take too long to come on.The process is too complex. We need to helpmagistrates to deliver for the law-abiding citizen.

Rt Hon Lord Falconer of Thoroton QCSecretary of State for Constitutional Affairsand Lord Chancellor


4

Executive summary

1 The effective administration of justice is vital to the safety, security and prosperity ofour country. The magistracy and magistrates’ courts are at the heart of the Government’svision for delivering justice and reducing crime and anti-social behaviour. They play a vitalrole in delivering justice: magistrates’ courts deal with nearly 95% of all criminal cases inEngland and Wales.

2 This report is part of the Supporting Magistrates to Provide Justice programme andfollows a major communications exercise. The Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA)asked all those that work in and with magistrates’ courts what could be done to improvethe performance of the courts and the public’s confidence in them. 2,300 peopleresponded and we are grateful for their contribution.

3 Magistrates’ courts must be connected to their community, they should be respectedand valued by the community, and they must be effective and fair in dealing with the casesbefore them. There must also be improved procedures for the recruitment and retention ofmagistrates.

4 Working trilaterally with the CJS agencies (DCA, Home Office and Office of theAttorney General), much has already been done in response to the views expressed duringthe communications exercise. This paper reviews our progress and sets out our proposalsfor further changes and reforms.

To ensure magistrates’ courts are better connected to their community:

The Government has:

• Introduced Community Payback.

• Increased by a third our funding for support of the Magistrates’ Associations’ Magistratesin the Community projects.

• Supported the Lord Chief Justice in issuing guidance that supports magistrates’involvement with the work of local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships.

The Government will:

• Extend the concept of community justice – learning from models such as the LiverpoolCommunity Justice Centre.

• Expand the highly successful Magistrates’ Mock Trial competition.

• Establish communications strategies in each courts area to engage the media to achievea better understanding of the work of Magistrates’ courts.

• Develop proposals for how the magistracy, along with the judiciary will be supported bythe Communications Unit of the Office of the Lord Chief Justice.

To ensure magistrates courts are respected and valued:

The Government has:

• Introduced Case Progression Officers and established clear case progressionresponsibilities for magistrates and district judges.

5


• Established explicit responsibilities for all parties in criminal cases who will be obligedto nominate a named person responsible for the effective progress of the case.

• Made it a criminal offence for defendants who fail to provide information about theirfinancial means.

• Introduced automatic attachment to earnings and deductions from benefits from sourcefollowing an offender’s first default and increased the level of deductions from benefitsfrom £2.80 to £5 from December 2004 to enable fines to be paid off more quickly.

• Established a national enforcement service.


• Make it clear that defendants who fail to attend court without good reason can expecttheir trial and, if found guilty, their sentencing to proceed in their absence.

• Establish Witness Care Units in all areas by December 2005.

• Establish video links in court and separate witness waiting facilities.

• Appoint Fines Officers in every courts area and prioritise the use of Compensation Orders.

• Improve the way in which we communicate with victims following the award of compensation.

• Extend the facility for offenders to make payments through payment cards and addressthe lessons learnt during Operation Turn-up.

To ensure courts are more effective in dealing with cases:

The Government has:

• Appointed uniformed court security officers with the power to search, exclude, removeor restrain people from or in the court building.


• Consult on its intention to deal with selected low-level offences in alternative ways toensure the best use is made of magistrates’ court time. This will include:

– Handling the administrative and judicial processes in TV licence cases withoutautomatic recourse to a full magistrates court bench.

– Options for more efficient handling of summonses and liability orders in council tax cases.

– Establishing an administrative process with the DVLA that will enable uncontested highvolume, low level motoring offences to be dealt with outside of the courts.

– Consideration of extending the use of dedicated courts to handle road traffic offencesbuilding on the experience of the London Traffic courts.

• Establish a 5-Year Estates Strategy focussed on the needs of the public and victims andwitnesses in particular that will raise the standard of our courthouses.

• Introduce new offences of obstructing and injuring court security officers.

• Set and publish standards for our customer services.


6

To improve the recruitment and retention of magistrates:

The Government has:

• Provided every local Advisory Committee with a range of tools and resources, such asadvertisements for local papers and radio, to support the recruitment and selection ofnew magistrates.

• Established a national free-phone (0800 003 007) for handling enquiries and issuingapplication packs on how to become a magistrate.

• Created a new website dedicated to prospective candidates or employers.

• Made substantial improvements to the approval process making it quicker andmore flexible.

• Established a working party of senior employers groups to address the barriers thatprevent those in full time employment from taking up the role of a magistrate.

• Put in place a process whereby the Lord Chancellor will award magistrates of over20 years standing with certificates for long service.

• Introduced new guidance allowing magistrates to use the post nominal letters JP(Justice of the Peace) in all but a few specified circumstances.

• Agreed that the modern magistracy should no longer be referred to as ‘lay’.


• Provide all Advisory Committees with the help of recruitment specialists to target localemployers.

• Provide jurors on completion of their period of service with recruitment material onapplying for the magistracy.

• Reduce the time from recommendation to appointment of magistrates from 10 to 6weeks (including a criminal records check).

• Consult on new arrangements about enabling magistrates to take time off from work.

• Consult on the reduction of the minimum-sitting requirement of all magistrates from 26 to24 half days.

• Develop training programmes, which maximise the opportunities afforded through newtechnologies to deliver training to magistrates in ways that fit with their othercommitments to work and family.

• Introduce good practice guidelines for minimising and managing the cancellation ofmagistrates’ scheduled sittings at short notice.

Much achieved, much more to do

5 This is not the end of the Supporting Magistrates to Provide Justice programme – thisis the next step in a continuous drive to provide the public with the service they expectfrom a modern magistrates’ courts system.

6 We will continue to look for further improvements so that our services are as efficientand effective as possible, making best use of the capacity of the courts, and of the talentand expertise of those working in them.

7 We are grateful to everyone who has contributed to the work that led to this report.

7

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Executive Summary

Introduction: The magistrates’courts in context

Background and historical context

1 The effective administration of justice isvital to the safety, security and prosperity ofour country. If people are confident that thejustice system is fair, impartial and carried outby people from their own communities, theywill be more likely to respect and supportthose who are responsible for enforcing it.Magistrates are critical to this approach andprovide a clear link between the communityand the justice system.

2 The role of the magistrate dates back tothe 12th century, when Richard I appointed thefirst ‘Keepers of the Peace’ in 1195. These‘Keepers’ had a policing role, which continuedto evolve until the Justice of the Peace Act in1361 introduced ‘justices’, who served on apermanent basis and with an increasinglyjudicial role1.

3 In the mid 19th century magistrates losttheir policing role to the embryonic police forceand their administrative role to the emerginglocal councils. But they retained their judicialduties2.

4 In the early part of the last century,magistrates were increasingly appointed on thebasis of their personal qualities, rather thanbased on wealth, property-ownership or status.

5 The modern day magistracy bears littleresemblance to its ancient origins. It is nowmore diverse, drawn from all social backgroundsand has different powers and responsibilities.But the qualities of today’s magistracy – fairness,good character, understanding of people andthe application of sound judgement – havebeen consistent for decades.

6 Until 31 March 2005 the magistrates’courts were administered on a local basis, by42 individual Magistrates’ Courts Committees(MCCs). At the same time the County, Crownand Supreme Courts were administered bythe Court Service, an executive agency of theDepartment for Constitutional Affairs. The 2002White Paper Justice for All recommended thata single agency should be developed tosupport the delivery of justice in all courts inEngland and Wales and enable the provisionof improved and consistent service to all courtusers. The Courts Act 2003 provided the legalframework that enabled the changes to bemade and a single national service, Her Majesty’sCourts Service, was established on 1 April 2005.

7 The creation of Her Majesty’s CourtsService (HMCS) has created a comprehensivenational courts service that encompasses themagistrates’ courts. We now have the ability totarget investment in the courts and make betteruse of the capacity within different courts inorder to deliver better services to the public.Magistrates’ courts have a critical role to playin ensuring that we continue to innovate andimprove our services.


8

‘‘I think a lot of young people feelterribly disenfranchised, disempoweredand certainly in poorer cities and areasthey feel very peripheral to theestablishment, the system and rightly so.And the magistracy gives them a foot in;it gives them a way in to feel part of thesystem, to feel empowered.’’A magistrate

‘‘I don’t believe that sentences alwaysneed to be passed within the magistrates’court system, taking up court time andcourt costs, clogging up the system.’’A magistrate

1 Bryan Gibson, Introduction to the magistrates’ court, Waterside Press: Winchester, 2001.2 Michael Berlins and Clare Dyer, The Law Machine, Penguin Books, London 2000.

The magistrates’ courts today

Magistrates8 There are more than 28,000 magistratesin England and Wales. The role of magistrate isvital to the operation of the justice system andthey are a key part of the judicial family.Magistrates’ courts deal with over 95% of allcriminal cases in England and Wales.Magistrates make an essential contribution toreducing crime and anti-social behaviour andensuring our communities are safe and secure.They also make a significant contribution tothe civil and family justice system.

9 The Government greatly appreciatesthe work of magistrates and recognises thattheir role is central to the justice system. TheGovernment also acknowledges that the rolecan be a demanding one. By becoming amagistrate, people are making a significantcommitment to their communities both in timeand energy. The Government is determinedto do more to help and support magistrates.This report sets out what we have done andthe further steps we will take to support themagistracy and magistrates’ courts moreeffectively.

District judges (magistrates’ courts)10 The role of district judges (magistrates’court) in the magistrates’ court is a critical one.The Government highly values the work alldistrict judges (magistrates’ court) do. Theybring legal expertise to the Bench and helpprogress complex, lengthy or technical cases.

11 Where there is a new area of the law,district judges (magistrates’ court) can helpcourts understand new legislation. Theexpertise they bring means that courts candeal with unusual or complex cases fairly andpromptly. District judges (magistrates’ court)also provide an around-the-clock response todeal with extradition and terrorism cases andprovide assistance when a court is floodedwith cases. District judges (magistrates’ court)

can provide guidance, support and advice oncomplicated issues and in difficult circumstances.

Justices’ clerks

12 Justices’ clerks have been valuablecontributors to the criminal justice system fora very long time. The appointment requires thepost-holder to be a solicitor or barrister of fiveyears’ standing, or be a solicitor or barristerwith five years’ experience of working inmagistrates’ courts.

13 The justices’ clerk plays an essentialrole in the magistrates’ court. He or she is thesenior lawyer to the magistracy and providesconsistent and accurate advice to the bench,both personally and through the team of legaladvisors. They are also responsible for thetraining of magistrates, subject to the guidanceof the Judicial Studies Board, and facilitate thebench in its dealings with court users andpartner agencies.

Court staff14 Much of the work of the Magistrates’courts takes place outside the courtroomfrom preparing cases for trial to ensuring finesimposed by Magistrates are enforced. Well-trained and competent court staff are neededto ensure that this work is conducted smoothlyand that Magistrates are supported inexercising their duties. Court staff have acommitment to providing a quality service,and often develop and work on initiativesthat go beyond their normal call of duty.The Government values their dedicationto public service.

9

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Introduction: The magistrates’ courts in context

‘‘…I feel very proud of myself that myown community is giving me that muchrespect but they feel respected as well,that they feel that whatever the judgmentwill be passed will be fair.’’A magistrate

‘‘Why have we been constantly toldthat we can’t use the letters JP? Surelyit would be better for the public to knowwho we are, to show that we do liveand work locally and that we areapproachable.’’A magistrate

‘‘We get a lot out of life and it’s puttingsomething back in …doing somethingthat’s worthwhile.’’A magistrate

The current context

15 The crime rate is falling. The chance ofbecoming a victim of crime is at its lowestsince the British Crime Survey (BCS) began in1981. The BCS reported a 7% drop in crimecompared with 2003-04. In particular, violentcrime was down 11%. Vehicle crime anddomestic burglary were also down (by 11%and 20% respectively). Perceived anti-socialbehaviour was steady, with 17% believingthere was a serious problem with disorder intheir area

16 The 2004/05 BCS shows that confidencein the CJS has improved in all areas (where atrend is possible) compared with the previousyear. Perceptions about crime3 are alsoshowing a more positive picture. Theproportion of people who believe that crimehas increased over the past two years, both intheir local area (42%) and in the country as awhole (61%), has fallen compared with theprevious year.

17 Between 1993-2003 the following trendsin sentencing in the magistrates’ courts wereobserved: the number of indictable offencesdid not increase or decrease significantly, theuse of custody increased, the use of communitysentences increased and the use of finesdecreased.

• The numbers sentenced per year forindictable offences in magistrates’ courtsvaried between approximately 187,500 (in1996) and 220,500 (in 1999)4.

• The use of custody increased (from 6%to 16%)5, remaining constant from 2001onwards.

• The use of community sentences hasincreased (from 21 to 26%)6.

18 Between 2003 and 2004 the activity incourt has changed as follows: more offenceswere brought to justice, more people weretried, fewer people were sentenced to custody,and more anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs)were ordered.

• Around 2,037,000 defendants wereproceeded against at court in 2004 (around2,001,000 in 2003).8

• Around 1,534,000 people were triedat the Magistrates’ courts in 2004 (around1,464,000 in 2003).9

• Around 61,000 people were sentenced tocustody at the magistrates’ courts in 2004(around 63,000 in 2003).10

• 2,293 ASBOs were given in 2004(1,040 in 2003).


10

‘‘We’re so glad we took part in theMock Trials; the competition is a greatlearning experience. We now have a farbetter understanding of court cases andthe law in general.’’A member of the public

‘‘The Magistrates in the Communityinitiative is gradually correcting themedia image of the magistracy. Morecan be done with schools, colleges andcommunity bodies.’’A magistrate

3 British Crime Survey Data 2004/05 publication.4. 5, 6, 7 Sentencing Guidelines Council Newsletter – The sentence May 2005, Issue 2.8, 9, 10, 11 Sentencing Statistics 2004, England and Wales.

19 The average sentence length for thosesentenced to immediate custody fell sharplybetween 1993 and 1998 from 3.2 months to2.6 months. From 1998 to 2003, the averagesentence length has remained fairly constantat 2.5 months.

11

20 We need to review the way we deliverpublic services through the courts to reflectthis changing backdrop, the opportunitiespresented by the creation of a nationalMagistrates’ Service and the views of those whooperate, use and rely on the magistrates’ courts.

Supporting magistrates to providejustice

21 At the Annual General Meeting of theMagistrates’ Association (MA) on 26 October2004 Lord Falconer, the Secretary of State forConstitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor,launched a new programme: ‘SupportingMagistrates to Provide Justice’.

22 The aim of the programme was to identifythe key issues of concern for magistratesand to develop a plan to improve the supportprovided to them. The Secretary of Stateoutlined four key areas:

• helping to ensure magistrates are connectedto their communities

• ensuring magistrates are respected andvalued, with court orders obeyed

making sure magistrates are effective indealing fairly and efficiently with the casesbefore them and

• recruitment and retention of magistrates.

23 A fundamental part of the programmewas to make sure individual magistrateshad the opportunity to express their concernsand suggest areas for improvement. Theprogramme included:

• a series of visits by the Secretary of Stateand other Ministers to magistrates’ courtsacross England and Wales. These visitsincluded discussions with magistrates,district judges, victims, witnesses andcourt staff

• the distribution of a questionnaire to developqualitative information from magistrates,district and deputy district judges, magistratesliaison judges, justices’ clerks, a range ofdefence solicitors and senior managers inHMCS. It was also available to the publicvia the internet

• a series of focus groups with members ofthe public and in-depth telephone interviewswith individual magistrates

• involvement of stakeholders in the progressof the programme and consideration of theideas it generated.

11

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Introduction: The magistrates’ courts in context

‘‘Courts could probably be readier to hearcases in the absence of defendants.’’A district judge

‘‘TV licences, tax discs and non-endorsable traffic matters should be dealt with elsewhere.’’A district judge

12 Sentencing Guidelines Council Newsletter: The sentence, May 2005 – Issue 2.

‘‘More must be done to ensure thatvictims who have been awardedcompensation are kept informedthroughout the enforcement process.’’A magistrate

24 The senior presiding judge, the seniordistrict judge, the Magistrates’ Association, theJustices’ Clerks’ Society, magistrates’ courtsstaff unions and all the criminal justicedepartments have supported this programme.

Results of thecommunications exercise

25 The full results from this exercise are setout in Supporting Magistrates to ProvideJustice Response Paper, published in March2005 (www.dca.gov.uk/magist/support/response.pdf).

26 2,300 written submissions were receivedin response to the communications exercise.Magistrates made up 2,144 of the responses,with the others coming from district anddeputy district judges, Local Criminal JusticeBoards (LCJBs), magistrates’ liaison judges,Advisory Committee members, court staff,other members of the legal profession, andmembers of the general public.

27 The exercise produced around 10,000separate suggestions. Many took up similarthemes. We have analysed the responses andgrouped them within the key themes ofconnected, respected, effective andrecruitment/retention.

28 On 14 March 2005 we hosted aconference for over 400 people from acrossthe criminal justice system, including asignificant number of magistrates, to presentfeedback on the responses received from theexercise.

29 Our clear intention is to improve theservices we deliver to the public. We havereviewed what we do, how we do it and howbest we can support those working in thecourts to provide the best possible service.This report sets out the improvements we,working collaboratively across the CJS, havealready made and the further measures we willdevelop in order to improve support formagistrates’ courts and service to the public.


12

‘‘Keep witnesses and the publicseparate from defendants as this isa major barrier to coming to court.’’A magistrate

‘‘Regular court open days, welladvertised locally, would help promotepublic awareness of the work of laymagistrates.’’A deputy district judge

13


Chapter 1: Communities – Connected

Summary of actions

The Government has:

• Introduced Community Payback (para 1.14).

• Increased by a third our funding for support of the Magistrates Association’sMagistrates in the Community projects, allowing magistrates to meet thecommunity in a more structured way. (para 1.18).

The Lord Chief Justice has:

• Issued guidance, which supports Magistrates’ involvement with the workof local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (para 1.12).

We will:

• Extend the concept of community justice – learning from models such asthe Liverpool Community Justice Centre (paras 1.7-1.9).

• Expand the highly successful Magistrates’ Mock Trial competition (paras1.22-1.23).

• Establish communications strategies in each courts area that engage themedia to achieve a better understanding of the work of Magistrates’ courtsand the Magistracy (para 1.28).

• Develop proposals for how the Magistracy, along with the judiciary, willbe supported by the Communications Unit of the Office of the Lord ChiefJustice (para 1.29).

Connected with the community

1.1 Magistrates’ courts and the magistracyare at the heart of delivering community justice.The magistracy, drawn from local communities,is the lynch pin in delivering justice locally.Magistrates’ courts play an essential role inmaking our communities safer places foreveryone who lives, works and plays in them.

1.2 We will support magistrates in understandingthe current priorities and concerns faced bythe local people they serve. Magistrates mustbe able to keep abreast of the changing issuesfacing their evolving and increasingly diversecommunities. The courts should continuallysearch for new and innovative ways to respondto the needs of the public.

1.3 This Government is determined to tacklethe crime and anti-social behaviour that blightso many communities. The ‘Together’ campaignwas launched in 2003 to provide support forfront-line workers and the general public intackling anti-social behaviour. Anti-socialbehaviour will be tackled, not tolerated.

1.4 The courts have a clear role to play intackling anti-social behaviour. Magistrates inall courts deal with the persistent anti-socialactions of the few, which make a misery ofthe lives of so many. There are now 154Anti-Social Behaviour Response Courts, in30 different LCJB areas, which bring togetherbest practice in listing such cases.

1.5 Dedicated courts have also been used todeal with domestic violence cases. Domesticviolence courts were initially piloted in Croydonand Caerphilly and proved to be successful insupporting victims and witnesses, and ensuringthat the number of cases where no evidencewas offered fell from 46% to 28%. Domesticviolence courts are now up and running, orplanned, in 18 areas.

1.6 Similarly, we are committed to pilotingdedicated drugs courts in West London andLeeds later this year.

Community justice

1.7 The Community Justice Centre in Liverpool13

has taken this a step further through a holisticapproach of empowering local people toengage with and influence the priorities of thecourt. The CJC delivers justice at a local level.It brings together the many agencies andservice providers operating in the criminaljustice system under the leadership of onejudge, able to exercise multiple jurisdictions.It adopts a problem-solving approach towardsoffenders that combines help for underlyingproblems with punishment that, as far aspossible, makes viable reparation to thecommunity. As part of the pilot, the judge hasdirect contact with local people at meetings tohear at first-hand their concerns and prioritiesfor the criminal justice system, and to reportback about action taken to address these.

1.8 We will look at the benefits delivered bythis approach and see how it might be builtupon in other courts. For instance, work hasbegun to develop an initiative in Salford to testhow community justice problem-solving andcommunity engagement can be integrated intothe mainstream Magistrates’ courts system.Community justice is a locally based problem-solving approach to anti-social behaviour andcrime. It will make the court and other criminaljustice agencies more responsive to theconcerns of their local community and willincrease public confidence in the criminaljustice system.

1.9 The Salford initiative will ensure a timelyresponse to crime and anti-social behaviour.As in Liverpool, sentences imposed by thecourt will include a reparative element, andoffenders will be put into programmes to tacklethe underlying causes of offending.

1.10 One idea worthy of further considerationis that some young people would benefit fromseeing what happens in an adult prison orYoung Offenders Institution. Spending a dayin such an establishment on a supervised visitcould be beneficial in deterring young peoplefrom offending. This might be organised by localyouth groups or as part of a young offender’ssupervision in the community. Such visits arealready taking place in parts of England andWales and we would encourage their wider use.

Crime and Disorder ReductionPartnerships (CDRP)

1.11 Crime and Disorder ReductionPartnerships (known in Wales as CommunitySafety Partnerships) include representativesfrom local, police, fire and health authorities.Working together they carry out an audit toidentify the prevalence of different crime,disorder and drug problems in their area anddevelop a strategy to tackle them. There are376 partnerships across England and Wales.

1.12 In March 2005 the Lord Chief Justiceissued guidance to all magistrates on how theyshould work with CDRPs. Engagement withCDRPs fosters a greater understanding within themagistracy of the pressures facing other localagencies. It also fosters greater understandingof the work of the magistrates’ courts andpressures faced by them. Magistrates are ableto bring a different perspective to discussionswithin the CDRP and add value particularly inrelation to the efficacy of local programmesfor tackling crime and anti-social behaviour.Closer working between all local agencies andthe courts will help to ensure a better serviceto the public throughout the justice system.


14

13 For more information, write to North Liverpool Community Justice Centre, Freepost 22064, Liverpool L22QY, tel: 0151 515 3086 or email [email protected]

Community Orders

1.13 Community Orders were introduced inthe Criminal Justice Act 2003 to increase theflexibility of sentencing options available in themagistrates’ court for offenders over the age of16. Each order may include an Unpaid WorkRequirement (formerly a ‘Community PunishmentOrder’). Unpaid Work Requirements makeoffenders undertake a range of tasks, supervisedby the National Probation Service, that notonly punish offenders for their offence but alsocontribute to improving the local environmentand other community resources. The Governmentbelieves members of communities affected bycrime and anti-social behaviour should helpdetermine the types of work and projectsthat are undertaken through unpaid workrequirements of community orders.

1.14 In August 2005 the National OffenderManagement Service launched CommunityPayback. Members of the public are able toselect unpaid work projects to be undertakenby offenders sentenced by the courts to unpaidwork requirements of community orders.

1.15 Every year, communities across thecountry benefit from over 5 million hours oflabour provided by offenders. CommunityPayback offers members of the public, whowill be appointed to local panels, the chanceto have their say on the type of projects thatshould be undertaken in their area.

1.16 In the past, such projects have broughtderelict areas and buildings back into publicuse, cleared churchyards, country streamsand unused allotments, and repaired parkbenches and playground equipment. Nowthe communities themselves will help setthe agenda for future activities.

Community engagement

1.17 The Government greatly appreciatesthe important work thousands of magistratesvoluntarily undertake outside of sitting in additionto their judicial duties. Over 3,000 magistratesare actively involved in the Magistrates’Association-sponsored Magistrates in theCommunity initiatives. These local initiatives aimto raise public understanding of magistratesand magistrates’ courts through givingpresentations to primary and secondaryschools, community groups and employers.

1.18 The Government has increased itsfunding to the Magistrates in the Communityinitiative by a third, from £90,000 in 2004 to£120,000 in 2005. Participation in theMagistrates in the Community initiative is nowfully recognised to be part of a justice’s duties,so magistrates may claim expenses incurredthrough these activities.

1.19 Numerous open days take place duringthe year that see thousands of people visitinglocal magistrates’ courts to learn more aboutthe work of the court. What we learn from theseopen days is that many people are interestedin the courts. We will embrace that interest andensure that more people are aware that courtsare, other than in exceptional circumstances,open to the public whenever they visit. We willbe working with court managers and the localmedia to advertise the courts being open.

1.20 The ‘Local Crime – Community Sentence’programme builds on the proven success ofMIC, in that the project involves a magistrateand a probation officer speaking to a varietyof community groups to deliver informationon how offenders are dealt with when theyhave committed a crime serious enough for acommunity sentence. LCCS has the support ofthe Lord Chief Justice and is recognised as akey player in raising awareness and confidencein community sentences.

1.21 The Lawyers-Schools Twinning Schemeis a programme designed by the CitizenshipFoundation for lawyers and schools. It consistsof a series of workshops facilitated by a traineeor qualified solicitors. The purpose of thescheme is to help young people learn aboutthe law, the justice system and current legaland moral issues. There is scope to use thisprogramme to advertise that courts are openand the general public can visit them whilethey are in session. The Citizenship Foundationis currently considering whether this could bepart of the programme.

15

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Communities – Connected

Magistrates’ National MockTrial Competition

1.22 The Magistrates’ National Mock TrialCompetition is an innovative and exciting wayfor young people to learn about the criminaljustice system and specifically the role ofthe Magistracy and courts. Around 370 stateschools, 4,500 pupils and 65 magistrates’ courtsthroughout England, Wales and NorthernIreland are involved in the competition everyyear. We will work closely with the CitizenshipFoundation and the Magistrates’ Associationon the future development of the scheme toinvolve more schools.

1.23 Teams consist of 12 or 13 students, fromYears 8 and 9, who use carefully constructedwitness statements to prepare the prosecutionand defence of a specially written criminal case.Students take the role of lawyers, witnesses,magistrates and court staff and compete againstother schools in a live format. Magistrates andother legal professionals judge their performancesand all the heats take place in magistrates’courts, usually on Saturdays.

Courts Boards and local people

1.24 The creation of HMCS on 1 April 2005also saw the establishment of Courts Boardsin each of the 42 administrative areas. TheCourts Boards work in partnership with HMCSto achieve effective and efficient administrationof the courts. They do not manage or administerthe courts themselves, but provide views, giveadvice and make constructive recommendationsto their Area Directors with the intention offostering improvements in the services thatHMCS provide in the local area. Membershipof each Courts Board must include a judge,

two magistrates from within the Courts Boardarea, two people with knowledge or experienceof the courts in the local area and two peoplewho are representative of people living in theCourts Board area. This diverse membershipensures that there is an effective avenue forcommunication between the administration,court users and the local community. It also meansthat members’ links with, and knowledge of,stakeholder groups and different communitiescan inform the Courts Board’s recommendations.

Communications and working withthe media

The courts1.25 The Government supports the principlethat justice should not only be done but thatit should also be seen to be done. The mediahas an important role to play in meeting thisgoal. The local press has traditionally providedcourt reports, written by reporters who regularlycover criminal justice matters. But there is morewe can do to ensure the local media is betterinformed about the work of the magistrates’ courts.

1.26 Currently, no report can be published inthe media, which reveals the name, photo,address or school of any child, or young personconcerned in youth court proceedings. Theyouth court does have the option of lifting thereporting restrictions, where appropriate, toenable media reports to identify the youngperson or children involved, after conviction.

1.27 The media have statutory rights to attendthe youth court and may report the proceedingseven where the automatic restrictions have notbeen lifted provided they do not identify anychild or young person. The Government willensure that all youth courts are fully aware thatthey have the discretion to lift the reportingrestrictions in any case involving children oryoung person upon application where they findit appropriate. The guidance issued to all youthcourts is currently being reviewed.

1.28 The Government believes the role of themagistracy should be visible to the communitiesthey serve. We will create a national and localcommunication strategy that will improvemedia handling across each of the 42 areas.topromote and support the work of the magistracyand the magistrates’ courts. We will also developtools to assist magistrates’ courts’ staff withmedia queries, as well as liaising with localschools and community groups, building onthe existing Magistrates in the Communityprogramme.


16

Students from Wood Green School, Oxfordshire,winners of the 2005 Mock Trial Competition

1.29 The Lord Chief Justice of Englandand Wales assumes the role of head of themagistracy in April 2006. He will be supportedby a new judicial communications unit. Acommunications support plan for magistrateswill form a major strand of a judicialcommunications strategy currently beingdeveloped by the unit. It will focus on providingbetter information to regional media on thework of their local magistrates. The role ofthe magistrate is a highly visible one and, onoccasion, support and advice will be provided forthose whose decisions engage media interest.

Local Criminal Justice Boards1.30 Media engagement is not just an issuefor the courts and the magistracy but for allagencies involved in criminal justice. LocalCriminal Justice Boards enable all CJS agenciesto work in a co-operative, co-ordinated way.They each have a dedicated communicationscapacity. HMCS Communications will workwith LCJB colleagues to promote the workof magistrates’ courts.

Plain English paperwork1.31 Fortunately, most people never have areason to attend court as part of the proceedings.But for those who do find themselves thevictim of a criminal act or the witness to acrime, their contact with the court must bemade as easy and comfortable as possible.

1.32 We will establish minimum standards forproducing information leaflets, forms, signageand directories in Plain English. All courtsmust have clear signage directing court usersinto and around the court. Many areas havealready produced useful leaflets and bookletsexplaining how magistrates’ courts work, andthe roles and responsibilities of the justicesand court officials. We will ensure consistencyacross all magistrates’ courts on good practice.We will also make available information on howmagistrates and district judges reach theirsentencing decisions, in order to help victimsand offenders to understand how and why aparticular sentence is given. This informationis currently available on the internet(www.jsboard.co.uk/magistrates/adult_court/index.htm), but we will ensure that it is moreaccessible to court users and the public. Courtinformation will be available in a number oflanguages other than English to match localrequirements.

17

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Communities – Connected


18

Chapter 2: Courts – Respected

Summary of actions

The Government has:

• Introduced Case Progression Officers and established clear case progressionresponsibilities for magistrates and district judges (paras 2.10-2.20).

• Established explicit responsibilities for all parties in criminal cases, who willeach be obliged to nominate a named person responsible for ensuring theyare doing all they can to support the effective progress of the case (para 2.14).

• Made it a criminal offence if defendants fail to provide information about theirfinancial means (para 2.45).

• Introduced automatic attachment to earnings and deductions from benefitsat source following an offender’s first default, and increased the level ofdeductions from benefits from £2.80 to £5 from December 2004, to enablefines to be paid off more quickly (paras 2.47-2.48).

• Established a national enforcement service (paras 2.78-2.81).

We will:

• Make it clear that defendants who fail to attend court without good reasoncan expect their trial and, if found guilty, their sentencing to proceed in theirabsence (para 2.6).

• Establish Witness Care Units in all areas by December 2005 (paras 2.23-2.25).

• Establish video links in court and separate witness waiting facilities (para 2.27).

• Appoint Fines Officers in every area and prioritise the use of CompensationOrders (paras 2.54-2.60 and 2.42).

• Improve the way in which we communicate with victims following the awardof compensation (para 2.43).

• Extend the facility for offenders to make payments through payment cardsand address the lessons learnt during Operation Turn-up (paras 2.50-2.53and 2.72-2.75).

Making court orders work

2.1 Courts are respected when the servicesand facilities they provide meet the needs ofthose that use and rely on the court, particularlyvictims and witnesses. This Governmentis committed to improving court facilities,providing efficient court processes and givingmagistrates the authority to ensure their ordersare obeyed.

2.2 Respect also relies on belief in the justicesystem being fair and equal. The reasons forallowing flexibility in the sentencing guidelinesare self-evident, yet this flexibility makes itinevitable that magistrates or district judgesmight, presented with the same offence, eacharrive at a slightly different sentence.

2.3 We believe that both magistrates anddistrict judges should work together to ensurea reasonable degree of consistency in sentencing,so that there can be no perception amongstcourt users that some benches might be morelenient. We will therefore, together with theSentencing Guidelines Council, work to developmechanisms for sharing knowledge and bestpractice between magistrates and district judges.

2.4 When offenders are convicted, thesentence ordered by the court must be carriedout. Respect for the criminal justice systemis dependent on it. Justice for the victimand law-abiding public is dependent on it.The rehabilitation of the offender is alsodependent on it.

2.5 The failure of offenders to comply withcourt orders significantly undermines publicconfidence in our justice system. The decisionof a defendant not to turn up at court is not ofitself an adequate reason for postponing acriminal case.

2.6 Failure to attend a court hearing withouta genuine reason creates a costly disruptionto the work of the court and increases the burdenon victims and witnesses. It also breedsdisrespect for the courts and the rule of law.Defendants who fail to turn up to court withoutgood reason should expect to be tried andsentenced in their absence.

2.7 In January 2004 the Lord Chief Justiceissued a practice direction that advocateddealing with Bail Act Offences immediately.This included imposing a sentence beforeproceeding with the original charge(s) againstthe defendant. The Sentencing Advisory Panelwill be undertaking a public consultation on thesentencing issues for these offences.

2.8 In January and February 2005 all 42 formerMagistrates’ Courts Committees contributedto Operation Turn-up, which was a series ofenforcement blitzes on people who had failedto appear at court. Operation Turn-up resultedin a reduction of over 20% of the number ofoutstanding failure to appear warrants.

2.9 We are building on the success ofOperation Turn-Up. Local Criminal JusticeBoards have set targets to further decreasethe number of outstanding failure to appearwarrants. Courts also have a target to notifythe police within one day of issuing any failureto appear warrant.

Trial preparation

2.10 The Government recognises the negativeimpact on public confidence in the justicesystem when a hearing is cancelled on the dayit was due to go ahead and is postponed to alater date. This is known as an ineffective trial.

2.11 The cost to the criminal justice system is£270 for every ineffective trial in the magistrates’court. Progress has already been made inreducing the number of ineffective trials inmagistrates’ courts, from 30.9% in July-September 2002 to 22.7% in January-March2005, but more can be done.

2.12 Magistrates and district judges requireeffective tools to manage the timely progressionof criminal cases. The Criminal Case ManagementFramework (CCMF) issued in July 2004 providesoperational practitioners, for the first time,with guidance on how cases can be managedefficiently and effectively from pre-chargethrough to conclusion.

2.13 The Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 wereintroduced last April. They apply to all partiesin the criminal courts, including the courtadministration, the prosecution, defence andpolice. For the first time in English legal history,the Criminal Procedure Rules consolidate allrules governing the practice and procedure ofthe criminal courts.

2.14 Part 3 of the Rules also introduces newpowers to manage the progression of criminalcases. The Rules make explicit the judiciary’sresponsibility for case management and, forthe first time, sets out new duties of the court.In particular, these duties are to:

• “nominate a judge, magistrate, justices’ clerkor assistant justices’ clerk to manage the case

• give a direction on its own merit or onapplication by a party

• to specify the consequences of failing tocomply with directions.”

2.15 The rules impose clear responsibilities oneach party to nominate an individual responsiblefor progressing the case, and inform otherparties and the court who the individual isand how to contact them.

19

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Courts – Respected

2.16 The Criminal Procedure Rules will ensurethat all parties fully understand their respectiveresponsibilities and the role they and othersplay in the delivery of justice. The secondedition of the Criminal Case ManagementFramework was issued on the 21 July 2005.The revisions include changes in procedureas a result of the introduction of the CriminalProcedure Rules on case management.

2.17 By December 2005 all areas will havecompleted their implementation of EffectiveTrial Management proposals, which includeupdating their local frameworks to ensure theyare consistent with the revised and updatedCriminal Case Management Framework. TheFramework is consistent with the CriminalProcedure Rules – the Rules say what needs tobe done and the Framework provides the detail.

2.18 Within the parameters set by the CriminalProcedure Rules, resident judges and magistrateswill be able to decide locally any changes thatneed to be made to court practices.

2.19 Under the Effective Trial ManagementProgramme, we began testing proposals toreduce ineffective trials including the use ofdedicated Case Progression Officers who

will certify trial-readiness. The best practiceidentified in the pilot areas has now been takenforward in the Criminal Case ManagementFramework, as all areas implement new waysof working. Areas where early implementationhas taken place have shown reductions ofbetween 4.6% and 11.5% in the number oftrials that fail to take place when scheduled.

2.20 The Magistrates’ Courts Effective, Cracked,Ineffective and Vacated Trials Guidance,together with two new monitoring forms, wasissued to courts on 11 August 2005. It nowroutinely and systematically collects data,qualitatively and quantitatively, about causesof failure to proceed in all trials. This data willbe used to address shortcomings both withindividual court users (e.g. prosecutors andtheir agents, defence solicitors and police)and with their agencies to avoid repetitionof professional failure. Her Majesty’s CourtsService (HMCS) will provide regular feedbackto criminal justice system (CJS) partners anddefence solicitors/barristers, and the LegalServices Commission (LSC) and will equallywelcome feedback on unacceptable courtfailure. There are also financial impositionsavailable to courts for wasted costs orders.


20

Figure 1: How the rate of ineffective trials has decreased since 2002

7%

6%

5%

4%

3%

2%

1%

0%

Magistrates Court – Trends for Main Reasons April 2005Quarter Ending

Jun02

Sep02

Dec02

Mar03

Jun03

Sep03

Dec03

Mar04

Jun04

Sep04

Dec04

Mar05

Jun05

Defendant absent – non-attendance Prosecution witness absent – otherOther Lack of court time/magistrateProsecution witness absent – police Defence not ready

Per

cent

age

of in

effe

ctiv

e tr

ials

Victims and witnesses

2.21 This Government is determined to put theneeds and concerns of victims and witnessesat the heart of the criminal justice system, astheir active participation is essential in bringingmore offences to justice and increasing publicconfidence in the system. We are modernisingthe system by introducing reforms to bringthese improvements about.

2.22 We have developed a statutory Victims’Code of Practice which sets out clearly theservices which victims can expect to receivefrom criminal justice agencies, including thecourts, and when they should expect to receivethem. It contains over 50 service obligationsthat the agencies will be required to provide tovictims when it is implemented in April 2006.The obligations on the courts include informingjoint police/CPS Witness Care Units of courtdecisions within one working day in casesinvolving other victims, so that victims can beinformed promptly about court orders. Anotherobligation on court staff is that they must ensure,as far as is reasonable within their control, thatvictims who are witnesses do not have to waitmore than two hours before giving evidence.

Supporting witness attendance

2.23 The No Witness, No Justice projectintroduces Witness Care Units (WCUs) acrossEngland and Wales with the aim of addressingvictims’ and witnesses’ needs in order to reducethe number who fail to turn up on the trial date.This will lead to fewer ineffective trials andhigher victim and witness satisfaction. Thenational rollout of WCUs is underway. EachCriminal Justice Area had one WCU up andrunning by March 2005 and all WCUs will bein place by December 2005.

2.24 WCUs bring the police and CPS togetherand provide a single point of contact forvictims and witnesses. A needs assessmentis carried out for all victims and witnesseswho are being called to court to identify anyproblems that could prevent the witness givingevidence or attending court. These problemsmight include childcare or transport problems,language difficulties, disabilities or particularconcerns such as intimidation. Witness careofficers co-ordinate the support and servicesprovided to the witness and keep theminformed throughout the case.

2.25 Witness Care Units, set up as part of theNo Witness, No Justice project, will ensure thatwitnesses receive a more thoughtful service,with any needs they have considered fromthe time a statement is first taken. If the caseproceeds to court, witnesses will regularly bekept up-to-date on how the case is proceeding,if and when they are required to give evidenceand informed about the final outcome. Witnesseswill have a single point of contact within thecriminal justice system and they will receivea responsive service that seeks to supporteach witness in a way tailored to meet theirindividual needs. At present, there are over 100Witness Care Units that are up and running,with full nation-wide coverage planned for theend of 2005. The Government is also committedto building a nation-wide network of victimsupport units that provide practical help tovictims of crime.

2.26 As well as the Witness Care Units, weare developing a Witness Charter, which willset out the core standards of service whichwitnesses should receive at every stage in theprocess. This will ensure that all witnesses willknow what to expect and how they should betreated as they go through the system. We willbe consulting on the Charter later this year.

2.27 Many of these reforms will help to improvethe experience of victims and witnesses whenthey attend court by making them feel moresecure, better informed, valued and appreciated.For example, video links enable vulnerable andintimidated witnesses to give evidence in a safeenvironment. Witnesses can fully participate,while being protected from coming into directcontact with people who may try to intimidatethem into not giving evidence. Since 2003, wehave been taking forward a programme designedto see video links in 75% of all magistrates’courts by March 2006. This was achieved oneyear ahead of target. We also have a programmeto provide dedicated witness waiting facilitiesfor prosecution and defence witnesses in 90%of magistrates’ courts by December 2008. ByJune 2005 85% of magistrates’ courts wereproviding separate witness facilities.

21


2.28 £4million from the Victims’ Fund hasbeen allocated to develop community-basedservices for victims of sexual crime. The moneyhas been awarded to a range of voluntary andcommunity sector organisations and partnershipsacross England and Wales, such as RapeCrisis and survivor organisations. It will helpto continue and extend their valuable workin providing practical and emotional support,counselling, information and advocacy services.

Enforcement

2.29 Respect for the courts and the criminaljustice system will only improve when thepublic has confidence that the orders of thecourt are obeyed, quickly and in full.

Improving the collection of fines andcompensation orders

2.30 When a court sentences an offender,the sentence must be carried out. TheGovernment recognised in 2003 that there wasan unacceptable level of performance in thecollection of fines, undermining them as aneffective penalty. In September 2003 DCAestablished the Fine Enforcement Programmeto tackle the problem.

2.31 The Fine Enforcement Programme hassuccessfully delivered successive improvementsin the collection and enforcement of financialimpositions, i.e. fines, costs orders andcompensation orders. In June 2003 thepayment rate was 69%. By March 2005 thishad improved to 80%. The target paymentrate for 2005/06 has been set at 81%.

2.32 To support courts’ Civilian EnforcementOfficers, we have been piloting a range of newmeasures that came into force through theCourts Act 2003. Offenders who flout theirobligations to pay up could find themselves:

• registered on the Register of Fines, Judgmentsand Orders for non-payment of fines

• with their vehicles clamped

• facing a larger fine if they fail to comply inthe first instance and/or

• facing a fine of up to £500 if they do not givefull information about their means to the court.


22

Figure 2: Improvement in the National Payment Rate from June 2003 to June 2005

Val

ue o

f fin

es c

olle

cted

as

a %

of f

ines

issu

ed

90%

80%

70%

60%

Quarter Ending

TargetQuarter Ending

March 2006: 81%

Quarterly Payment rateJune 2005: 80%

Jun03

Sep03

Dec03

Mar04

Jun04

Sep04

Dec04

Mar05

Jun05

Sep05

Dec05

Mar06

TargetQuarter EndingMarch 2004: 75%

TargetQuarter EndingMarch 2005: 78%

Trajectory

Comprehensive NationalFines Register

2.33 A comprehensive national register willcontain all fines that have been imposed by thecourt. This means there will be a full nationalpicture of all fines, so every magistrates’court will have access to an offender’s ‘courtaccount’ and will be able see if an offenderhas had any fines imposed in any other court.

2.34 Live trials of LIBRA (the internal IT systemof the magistrates’ courts service) have alreadybegun ahead of the national rollout in early2006. It will initially be possible to have area-based fines registers. Each area will be able tolog into another area (with permission) and seewhat fines have been imposed. After LIBRA hasbeen entirely rolled out in mid 2007, HMCS hascommitted to having a register that will hold alloutstanding fines on offenders’ accounts. Thiswill be a ‘data warehouse’ where all area datacan be stored.

Compensation orders

2.35 In 1972 the Compensation Order wasintroduced, giving magistrates’ courts andthe Crown Court a general power to order anoffender to pay compensation for personalinjury, loss or damage resulting from a criminaloffence. The Order reinforced the principle thatreparation has an important role in the penalsystem. It also removed the requirement forthe victim to subsequently take the matter tothe civil courts in order to secure compensation.

2.36 Compensation orders are part of therange of sentences available to the criminalcourts, and the courts are required to considermaking a compensation order in every casewhere the victim has suffered personal injury,loss or damage to property. When they do notmake a compensation order, the court mustdocument its reasons.

2.37 The level of the compensation order isbased on a calculation of the value of the lossor damages suffered by the victim, as set outin a list of Tariffs used in the civil and criminalcourts. The level of compensation awarded ismediated by considering the offender’s meansand ability to pay. The loss of income, whichaccompanies a custodial sentence, normallyresults in no compensation order being leviedwhen a person is sent to prison. Offenders areusually allowed time to pay, and to pay byinstalments.

2.38 The offender makes their compensationpayments to victims via the court, as part of afinancial imposition, which includes court costsand fines. Depending on the means of theoffender, the court can order that paymentsbe made in instalments over a set period oftime. We ensure that victims have priority bystructuring the payment scheme so that, whenpaid in instalments, the compensation order isalways paid first. However, when an offenderfails to make any payment, the victim fails toreceive their due compensation. In too manycases, the payment of compensation drags onfor too long and is paid in small amounts.

2.39 The Government acknowledges theparticular frustrations experienced by victimsof crime when offenders fail to pay theircompensation orders in a timely fashion andunderstands that speedy payment of thecompensation order aids the process ofrecovery that all victims undergo following thecrime. Delayed payments prolong this process,undermining the victim’s ability to get on withtheir life.

2.40 New guidance will be issued on makingcompensation orders, which pulls together allthe initiatives that aim to ensure all offendersmake appropriate recompense to their victims.

2.41 In 2004 the payment rate of compensationorders was only 50.36%, which is much lowerthan the national average for all fines. Thismust improve.

2.42 Our policy has been, and remains, thatthe payment of compensation awards to victimsis given the highest priority. We are determinedto ensure that this is effectively implemented.We will improve compliance and enforceorders when offenders fail to pay, sharing bestpractice learned through Operation Payback.

2.43 We will also improve the way in which thecourts communicate with victims following theaward of compensation. All victims will receivecontact from the court to explain the processand detail the reparations. Ongoing informationwill also be provided to ensure that victims areaware of the status of the payment of theircompensation.

23


Financial means

2.44 In April 2004 the Standard Means Formwas introduced to assist defendants in providingtheir financial circumstances. The form detailsthe defendant’s employment situation, incomeand expenditure. Magistrates use this informationwhen considering the level of a fine.

2.45 We have made it an offence not to provideinformation about financial means, when chargedwith an offence and following an official requestby the court. The information can be providedto the court either verbally or as a writtenresponse. Failure to provide means informationcan lead to a fine of up to £1000.

2.46 Initial studies have shown that where acourt has a completed Standard Means Format the outset, with information that can besubsequently used in an Attachment ofEarnings or Deduction from Benefit Orders,this acts as an effective deterrent to non-compliance with fines payment.

2.47 The Government supports the impositionof Attachment of Earnings Orders or Deductionfrom Benefits Orders at the time of sentencingon an existing defaulter and automatically ondefault by any other offender.

2.48 From December 2004 the amount thatcan be deducted from Income Support orJobseeker’s Allowance, in the form of aDeductions from Benefits Order, increasedfrom £2.80 per week to £5.

2.49 ‘Fine payment work orders’ arecurrently being piloted in Cheshire, Cumbria,Cambridgeshire, Devon and Cornwall andSouth Yorkshire. These allow offenders wholack the means to pay an appropriate fine to‘work off’ their punishment though carrying outunpaid work in the community. The Governmentwill review the performance of these pilot studieson their completion and consider nation-wideintroduction of this alternative sentence.

Payment cards

2.50 At the time a fine is imposed, theoffender receives an order that details howpayments can be made. HMCS has takenforward the payment arrangements for eachlocal area as they existed under the previousmagistrates’ courts’ Committees. Thesearrangements varied from area to area.

2.51 Payment cards have been used in manycourt areas for a number of years and half ofthe HMCS areas currently have this facility,which is provided by three different suppliers.The contracted supplier issues the card on theadvice of the court. The card allows for paymentsto be made wherever there is a machine thatsupports the scheme. Payment machines aretypically found in corner shops, petrol stationsand post offices.

2.52 The payer presents the payment card withhe payment he/she wishes to make; the card isswiped through a dedicated machine. The courtis immediately notified of payment via thecontracted supplier. Payment is usually receivedin the court’s account within 10-14 days.

2.53 Where not already in place, courts areencouraged to develop flexible payment methods.In the long term we will identify which methodsof payment work most effectively and why, andensure that all courts act on this information.

Fines Officers

2.54 Paying fines and complying with courtorders, whether to attend court or undertakecommunity punishment are not optional. TheGovernment is determined that all court orderswill be rigorously enforced.

2.55 Through the Courts Act 2003 we createda new role of Fines Officer. Fines officers will beresponsible for the administrative managementof fines and will have at their disposal a rangeof new enforcement measures powers to deteroffenders from defaulting. By March 2006every area will have at least one fines officer.Numbers will vary in each area depending onworkloads and the size of the area.

2.56 This role will be key to delivering sustained,improved enforcement performance and will beresponsible for enforcing accounts that havedefaulted. Fines officers will be responsible forthe day-to-day management of the court order.The fines officer is not a judicial figure andtheir decisions will be subject to appeal to thecourt. Some decisions are reserved entirely forthe court, specifically fines payment work orders(see para 2.56 below), the sanction to increasea fine and the selling of a clamped vehicle.


24

2.57 Magistrates in the courtroom currently setpayment terms for fines and court orders. TheStandard Means Form will give Magistrates theinformation they need to set the level of fineand/or Compensation Order. Fines officers willnow relieve the bench of the time-consumingburden of having to negotiate terms for thepayment of a fine that cannot be paid immediately.

2.58 The fines officer will confirm and, wherenecessary, complete the information providedby offenders on their means, direct offenders todebt management information where appropriateand explain the offender’s responsibilities forpaying their financial impositions. In the pilotareas, this process has been demonstrated toreduce default, as offenders better understandthe consequences following default.

2.59 In addition, the fines officer will be able toplace the name of an offender on the Registerof Fines and Judgments. Data on the registerwill be accessible to anyone, including thosefrom whom an offender might be seekingemployment, accommodation and/or accessto services generally. Those registered mayhave their ability to take out loans and enterother credit arrangements severely restricted.

2.60 Fines officers will also have a new powerto issue a clamping order on a defaulter thatallows the defaulter’s car to be clamped, towedaway and held in storage, until the original fineand additional costs are paid. If the defaulterdoes not pay the full amount within a 30-dayperiod, magistrates can issue a further orderfor the car to be sold with the proceeds usedto pay the outstanding debt. The evaluation ofthe Fines Collection Scheme found the clampingsanction to be a very powerful tool. The threatalone of the car being clamped has proved tobe highly effective in recovering fines.

2.61 For those offenders who are havingdifficulty managing their financial affairs, Finesofficers will be tasked with directing them tospecialist advice agencies.

Fine Payment Work Orders

2.62 For those who genuinely cannot affordto pay, we will be looking to introduce theoption for the court to make a Fine PaymentWork Order. We are piloting this Order in anumber of areas. Orders made so far haveinvolved working in a church or serving incharity shops to discharge the fine. In Chapter 1,we described how the National ProbationService will involve members of the publicin determining future projects.

Failure to pay

2.63 Magistrates will have the power toincrease the fine when payment terms havenot been complied with. Following the findingsof a pilot study, the Government believes thatthis is currently a more effective measure thanlate fines being made subject to an interestcharge. We will, however, keep this issueunder review.

2.64 The Government is committed to thejudiciary having a range of penalties at theirdisposal, with the independence to imposethe most appropriate sentence within theguidelines established by the SentencingGuidelines Council.

2.65 A custodial penalty remains the ultimatesanction for wilful default under the newlegislative framework in the Courts Act 2003.Non-payment of fines or breaches of courtorders could result in a custodial sentence.The Government is determined to improvecompliance in the first instance and toreinvigorate fines as a credible penalty.

Operation Payback

2.66 The Government believes that a variety ofenforcement techniques should be employedto prevent defaulters becoming so familiarwith the process that they know how to avoidbeing traced. In 2004 we undertook a series ofnationally co-ordinated enforcement campaignsentitled ‘Operation Payback’, across England andWales. Magistrates’ courts, working with thepolice, targeted specifically selected defaulters.

25


2.67 Operation Payback proved a resoundingsuccess, recovering in excess of £2.4 millionin uncollected fines and encouraging closeworking between criminal justice systemagencies. The operations have sent a clearmessage to offenders that the Governmentwill not tolerate non-payment of fines. Furtherblitzes have been planned and a third nationalOperation Payback is scheduled for late 2005.

2.68 This year courts will be allowed to publishin the media the details and photographs offine defaulters wanted on warrant. The purposeof this is to seek the assistance of the publicin tracing a selection of offenders that havedefied all other attempts to execute process.Steps will be taken to confirm that doing so isfair and proportionate to the individual. Eachcourt has been sent a set of clear guidelines toprovide a steer on the steps that should betaken before publishing the defaulter’s details.

2.69 In June 2003 the Government announcedthat outstanding fines would no longer bewritten off.

2.70 We will look to enhance our ability tospecifically target the older accounts where itis clear that the magistrates’ courts enforcementteams have done everything within theirpower to try and trace offenders and collectmonies owed.

2.71 In two HMCS areas we are currentlypiloting the use of a private-sector debtcollection agency to pursue ‘uncollectable’debt, i.e. those accounts where the court hadalready tried all it could to enforce the fine.We are also running an in-house exercise onsimilar old cases so that we can compare andcontrast results with the pilots. We will analysethe results of both exercises and bring forwarda strategy to ensure that old debts are pursuedand offenders expected to pay their fine nomatter how long it has been outstanding.

Fail to appear (FTA) warrants

2.72 For the first time, Local Criminal JusticeBoards have been set targets to furtherdecrease the outstanding number of fail toappear (FTA) warrants

2.73 Building on the success of OperationTurn-up, a series of local campaigns bypolice forces to reduce the overall numberof outstanding warrants, the aim is to reduceoutstanding FTA warrants by a further 19%in England and Wales by April 2006.

2.74 Courts also now have a target to notifythe police of 90% of all FTA warrants withinone working day and 100% within threeworking days.

2.75 We will crack down on the hard core ofpeople who snub the courts. Respect for thecourt means enforcing the orders of the courtand compliance in the first instance. We willmake sure that trials go ahead when scheduledand are not repeatedly put off. Improvingattendance at court by defendants andwitnesses enhances our service to victimsof crime and the law-abiding public.

Community Penalty Breach Warrants

2.76 Also, since 1 October 2005, for the firsttime national end-to-end targets have been setfor the resolution of cases where offendersbreach a community order. Local CriminalJustice Boards are responsible for the deliveryof the targets at area level. The targets to beachieved by the end of March 2006 are:

• Community Penalty Breach Proceedingsshould take an average of 35 working daysfrom the relevant unacceptable failure tocomply to resolution of the case.

• 50% of all breach proceedings should beresolved within 25 working days of therelevant unacceptable failure to comply.

2.77 These targets will require all agencies(HMCS, NOMS, Youth Justice Board) to reviewtheir processes, and work together to speedup the end-to-end process from unacceptableabsence to resolution.


26

National Enforcement Service

2.78 In March 2005 the Government announcedthe formation of the National EnforcementService (NES). It will be tested in the NorthWest region in April 2006, with a full nationalrollout proposed for April 2007.

2.79 The NES will put in place a framework forimproved enforcement and sentence complianceand ensure respect for the authority of thecourts. The NES will have a distinct and clearlyidentifiable body of enforcement professionalsthat will focus on fine defaulters, compensation,those skipping bail and community penaltybreaches.

2.80 This is not about creating a brand neworganisation, but about introducing a moreeffective consortium approach to enforcementacross the CJS agencies

2.81 As a result, we will reduce duplication ofeffort both in the office and on the doorstepand build closer links between all the criminaljustice agencies. The NES will be a moreprofessional and effective organisation that willdeliver better sentence compliance, leading toincreased public confidence in the CJS.

27



28

Chapter 3: Courts – Effective

Summary of actions

The Government has:

• Appointed uniformed court security officers with the power to search, exclude,remove or restrain people from or in the court building (para 3.63).

We will:

• Consult on proposals to deal with selected offences in alternative ways. Thiswill include:

– Alternative methods for handling the administrative and judicial processesin TV Licence cases (paras 3.12-3.21).

– Options for more efficient handling of summonses and liability orders inCouncil Tax cases (paras 3.22-3.29).

– Establishing an administrative process with the DVLA that will enableuncontested high-volume, low-level motoring offences to be dealt withoutside the courts (paras 3.30-3.45).

– Extending the use of dedicated courts to handle road traffic offencesbuilding on the experience of the London traffic courts (paras 3.36-3.37).

• Establish a five-year Estates Strategy focussed primarily on the needs of thepublic and victims and witnesses, which will raise the standard of facilities atour courthouses (para 3.58-3.59).

• Introduce new offences of obstructing and injuring court security officers(para 3.64).

• Set and publish standards for our customer services (paras 3.73-3.78).

More effective courts

3.1 Our courts have a very important roleto play in the lives of every citizen. For thecommunity to feel truly connected with themagistracy and to genuinely respect the workof the magistrates’ courts, it is critical that thecourts deliver effective court services.

Alternative ways of dealing with somecourt work

3.2 The Government is committed to makingthe most effective use of the time, expertiseand skills of magistrates and district judges. Thecourtrooms should not be full of uncontested,low-level cases that do not require themagistrates and district judges to use theirjudicial skills to the fullest.

3.3 There is considerable scope for somecriminal matters (and civil matters that areheard in the magistrates’ courts) to be dealtwith in ways that do not require presentationbefore a full bench of the magistrates’ court.Respondents to the communications exercisesuggested that such a move would allow morecourt resources to be focussed on the morecomplex, higher-level cases.

3.4 The Government is committed to increasingthe expedition of cases and ensuring respectfor the law and the courts. We must ensurethere is sufficient capacity within courts toenable those high-level cases requiring judicialinput to be able to come before the courtquickly. For example, the Criminal JusticeAct of 2003 has made provisions to raise thesentencing powers of magistrates to a maximumcustodial sentence of 12 months from thecurrent maximum of 6 months. This mayincrease the workload in magistrates’ courtsof higher-level cases.

3.5 We are looking at a range of alternativeprocesses and methods of disposal for someof the high-volume, relatively low-level workin ways that do not adversely impact ondeterrence or the quality of justice. This willfacilitate swifter and more efficient justice andcreate capacity to deal with those that remainin the magistrates’ court. The examples ofTV licensing, council tax and some drivingoffences are discussed below. We will reviewand consult on the potential for disposing ofcertain types of cases by summary justice bypaper, with the usual recourse of judicial appeal.

3.6 The process for the issuing of summonsesvaries according to the type of offence and theprosecuting body involved.

3.7 Powers in the Criminal Justice Act 2003have enabled the police to issue a summonsfor minor offences. This removes the delaycaused by having the summons first presentedbefore the court for authorisation.

3.8 We will consult on the potential for thispower to be extended to other prosecutionbodies removing the need for courts toauthorise summonses where these can beappropriately transferred. This should lead toincreased efficiency. There were nearly 500,000summonses for criminal offences issued bypersons other than the police in 2004, of whichnearly 75,000 were for summary motoringoffences and nearly 400,000 for non-motoringsummary offences.

3.9 The Government will also develop anew model to provide a speedier processfor uncontested minor documentary offences,including handling some offences, such asfixed penalties, entirely by post.

District judges sitting withoutlegal advisors

3.10 In collaboration with the judiciary, we aredeveloping guidance outlining when districtjudges (DJs) can sit without legally qualifiedadvisors. The guidance will:

• reflect the operational issues on the ground(including clarifying the current position as toDJs sitting without legally qualified advisors)

• differentiate assistance provided to DJs bylegally qualified advisors and Administrators

• Provide examples of cases where theDJ could:

– sit with an administrative court clerk

– sit with a legally qualified advisor.

3.11 This should free up legal advisors onthese occasions to fulfil other duties suchas training Magistrates’ colleagues andmanaging cases.

TV licensing

3.12 Using a TV without a licence is an offenceof strict liability, carrying a maximum penalty of£1,000 (level 3 fine). The offence is governedby the Communications Act 2003, whichsuperseded the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949on 1 April 2003.

3.13 The BBC’s Royal Charter expires at theend of 2006 and the process of CharterReview is currently underway. In a Green Paperpublished earlier this year, the Governmentsignalled its intention that the licence feewould remain the main source of BBC fundingfor the next ten years, but undertook toconsider whether collection could be mademore efficient or enforcement less severe.

3.14 TV Licensing (TVL) is the trading name ofthe BBC agency responsible for collection of thelicence fee. On identification of non-paymentof licence fee, TVL sends a draft summons tothe magistrates’ court for authorisation by amagistrate or justice’s clerk.

29

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Courts – Effective

3.15 TV licence fee evasion continues to fallin the U.K from 5.7% last year to 5.0% atMarch 2005.

3.16 The cost of collecting the licence fee hascontinued to fall from 5.4% of total revenue in2003/4 to 5.2% in 2004/5 (see chart below).This reduction in evasion and controllingcollection costs means that the combined costhas now fallen to 10.2% of total licence feeincome, from 18.9% in 1991/1992 when theBBC took direct responsibility for licence feecollection from the Home Office. TV licensingcases make up 12% of court cases by volumebut these cases take up only 0.3% of thecourts’ time.

3.17 The Government acknowledges the workthat TVL have undertaken to improve their casepreparation and to work more effectively with thecourts. By creating dedicated Court Presenters,implementing enforcement best practice andstreamlining administrative processes inconsultation with the courts, much has beenachieved to make the present arrangementswork more efficiently. The Government believes,however, that by continuing to work with theBBC further efficiencies can be delivered.

3.18 The responses to our communicationsexercise suggested a number of alternativemethods for dealing with TV licence cases thatwould not require recourse to the court in thefirst instance. These included using a differentpenalty for the offence, such as Fixed PenaltyNotice (also recommended for consideration inthe Auld Report14), or a new penalty of a finewith condition attached.

3.19 Administrative alterations to the existingprocess were also suggested to remove orreduce some of the back-office burden ofthese cases, including transfer of the powerto issue and authorise summons to TVL andcentralisation of the administration of thesecases. We have considered all of thesesuggestions.

3.20 The number of licence evaders is declining.To radically change the system in terms ofpenalties available might serve to reduce thedeterrent that currently exists and actuallyincrease the volume of cases that result in acourt hearing. BBC research estimates that atleast 43% of the population are deterred fromoffending by the prospect of £1000 fine incourt. However, the Government recognisesthat there are improvements that can be madeto the way the cases are currently handledonce they reach the courts.

3.21 We will introduce greater use of dedicatedadministrative offices for the processing,authorising and issuing of summonses andconsider the alternatives to requiring a fullmagistrates’ court bench for all first hearings.We will also explore the benefits that mightbe gained, and the public acceptability, ofadopting a system where the BBC/TVL wouldbe given the power to authorise and issue itsown summonses/postal requisitions, where alladministrative work in these cases would thenbe bulk-processed, and where any resultantguilty pleas would be handled without recourseto a full magistrates’ court hearing.

Council tax

3.22 There are approximately 23 million dwellingssubject to council tax in England and Wales.In 2003/04, there were 4 million summonsesprocessed by magistrates’ courts administrativestaff for non-payment of domestic council tax,with 2.5 million liability orders and 50,000arrest warrants issued by the magistrates’court. There were an additional 400,000summonses, 200,000 liability orders and 3,000arrest warrants in non-domestic rates cases.

3.23 Where an outstanding amount of counciltax has not been paid after reminders havebeen sent, a local authority may apply to themagistrates’ court for authorisation to issue asummons to the non-payer. The summonsstates the time and place of the hearing toestablish liability. A liability order, if granted bythe court, formally establishes that there is adebt and enables the local authority to takeenforcement action.


30

14 A Review of the Criminal Courts of England and Wales by the Right Honourable Lord Justice Auld,September 2001 (http://www.criminal-courts-review.org.uk/).

3.24 Local authorities have a range ofenforcement tools that they may use to recoverthe debt. For example, they may recover thesums owed by seeking an attachment from thedebtor’s earnings, levy distress on the debtor’sgoods or take a charge on the debtor’s property.

3.25 Ultimately, local authorities have the powerto seek a committal to prison but can only do soafter at least one other enforcement measure(distress) has been taken. Before issuing acommittal warrant, the magistrates’ court musthold a means hearing to establish whether thedebtor has the means to pay the debt.

3.26 As described above, if a case proceedsto a committal hearing, there can be 3 separateinteractions between the local authority andthe local court concerned. Not all of theseinvolve a value-adding element for the courtor the magistracy, as some are simply formalauthorisation arrangements that do not requirejudicial skills.

3.27 We will work with local authorities andother key stakeholders to find ways to reducethe burden on magistrates’ courts in dealingwith council tax matters. There is currently nonational standard for the way that these casesare handled. Some areas have establishedhighly effective working relationships betweenthe local authority and the local court whilstother areas rely on more ad hoc arrangements.Therefore, in the shorter term we will focus onthe identification of best practice across allcourts and ensure this is shared nationally.

3.28 We will also consult on whether thecurrent process for issuing/authorisingsummonses and other processes shouldbe changed. Judges and magistrates wouldcontinue to be responsible for adjudicating oncontested cases, handling committal to prisoncases and issuing arrest warrants.

3.29 In addition, we are assessing the potentialbenefits and the deterrent effect that may begenerated by using provisions, already in placein the Courts Act 2003, to register with creditreference agencies those who fail to complywith a liability order.

Motoring

3.30 There are approximately 32 million licensedvehicles and 38 million licensed drivers inGreat Britain. The non-compliant are a smallminority, yet they pose a considerable burdenon the courts.

3.31 Summary motoring offences make up50% of total court proceedings. Theseoffences include:

• driver licensing prosecution (472,000 casesin 2003)

• motor insurance prosecutions (573,000cases in 2003) (see para 3.46)

• vehicle test prosecutions (372,000 casesin 2003)

• vehicle registration and vehicle excise duty(VED) cases (274,000 cases in 2003).

3.32 Unlike TV licensing and council taxoffences, a number of different prosecutingauthorities can undertake proceedings in courtfor documentation offences. Driving licence,insurance and most vehicle test offences areprosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Servicefor the police. The Vehicle Operator ServicesAgency (VOSA) prosecutes some vehicletest offences, as well as offences relating tocommercial operators, e.g. operator licensing,tachograph, overloading, and other commercialvehicle roadworthiness offences. The Driver andVehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) prosecutes forvehicle registration and excise licence offences.

3.33 There are an increasing number ofoffences detected by Automatic Number PlateRecognition (ANPR) technology. Police ANPRcameras are linked to various databasescontaining details of vehicles with a possibleassociation with an offence. When a passingvehicle is checked by an ANPR camera andmatched against a database, the police cantake appropriate action, which can includethe issue of a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN).

3.34 Work is already underway in both DVLAand the court system to ensure that SummaryVehicle Excise Duty cases are dealt withexpediently, particularly persistent offenders.Evidence suggests that the quicker the time fromoffence to disposal, the greater the likelihoodof receiving payment. Actions include:

31


Civil offences

• In January 2004 the Government introduceda scheme of Continuous Registration. Thisintroduced a new offence of being theregistered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle.This offence carries a civil penalty. The DVLAidentifies offenders through its database andthey are offered a late licensing penalty,which is similar to a fixed penalty regime. Forthose that do not pay the penalty, payment isenforced through the county court processrather than magistrates’ courts.

Criminal offences

• Improved preparation and processing ofVehicle Excise Duty cases through speedieridentification and processing of up to dateinformation enables easier tracking ofdefendants, which leads to more out ofcourt settlements being paid.

• Improved sharing of information betweeninterested parties, e.g. between the courtand the Department of Work and Pensions,with regards to up-to-date personal details,will improve the tracking of offenders.

• Clarification of the rules for the registrationof Motability vehicles will ensure clear andconsistent understanding by the DVLA andthe magistrates’ courts.

• Development of an intelligent web service isbeing explored, which will enable courts toprocess cases more efficiently by improvingthe communication links between courts andthe DVLA. It will result in fewer cases beingadjourned for reason of lack of defendant’sdocumentation.

• A trial is underway to ascertain if betterservice and improved tracking of offenderscan be delivered using the recorded deliveryprocess, rather than the first-class post.

3.35 DVLA has done much to reduce theburden on the Courts and to improve theefficiency of their prosecutions. The majorityof cases of using an unlicensed vehicle aresettled out of court. For many years, DVLAhas used the powers in the Customs & ExciseManagement Act 1979 to mitigate a penaltyand offer an out-of-court settlement that isbased on the amount of vehicle excise dutyevaded. DVLA can also impound cars anddispose of vehicles for non-payment of Vehicle

Excise Duty. In 2003/04 534,000 cases weresettled out of court. Those that do proceed tocourt are persistent offenders, i.e. those thathave committed a Vehicle Excise Duty offenceon at least two previous occasions, or thosethat do not accept the offer to settle out ofcourt. In 1991/2, DVLA began to employ theirown lay advocates and undertook their ownprosecutions, thereby relieving the burden onthe Crown prosecutors.

Designated sittings for DVLA cases(‘DVLA courts’)

3.36 In 2000/01 five dedicated DVLA courtswere set up in London to deal with all VED andregistration offences in the capital at specifiedsittings. These courts have enabled thesecases to be dealt with in greater numbersand with greater efficiency without apparentdetriment to the public. The situation nationallyvaries with some areas adopting similar systemsto help facilitate fewer sessions, while otherareas continue to list on a case-by-case basis.

Traffic courts in Greater London

3.37 In 2004 a decision was made to designatefive London courts to deal with all trafficoffences for specified areas. These courts havebrought apparent benefits for the prosecutionand the number of sessions required in court:there has been a reduction in the number ofsessions from 120 to 28. The full extent of theirbenefits is still being evaluated. Any extensionof these courts will be subject to furtherconsultation, which will be carefully consideredagainst the potential impact on the principle oflocal justice.

Making best use of FixedPenalty Notices

3.38 Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) are alreadyavailable for a number of motoring offences.As part of our effort to improve effectiveness,the Government is monitoring the impact ofexisting FPNs and will consider whether thereis a case for introducing FPNs for a widerrange of motoring offences.


32

Improved IT and data exchange

3.39 There are potential efficiencies to begained through improved IT and data exchange.Work is underway to drive this forward, includingimprovements to the exchange of data ondriver details. Phase one of DVLA’s project tore-engineer the drivers’ database is due to golive in November 2005. Following the necessaryIT provision being rolled out to the courts andaccess arrangements being agreed with DVLA,it will provide the platform to allow access fromany court to driver records direct from DVLA inreal time. Phase two in 2007 will allow a realtime two-way exchange (driver data to courtsand sentencing data to DVLA). This will help toreduce the number of cases that are currentlyadjourned for sentence when the offender hasfailed to bring their driving licence with them.

Persistent offenders

3.40 There is a need for a strategy fordealing with persistent offenders through themagistrates’ courts. DVLA and HMCS willdevelop a fast-tracking approach along withother options, such as listing fine defaulterswith credit reference agencies.

Improving the summons process

3.41 As in the case of council tax and localauthorities, the Government will use theCriminal Justice Act 2003 to extend to theDVLA ‘public prosecutor’ status to allow themto authorise all of their own summons withoutthe requirement of magistrates’ court scrutiny.In 2004/05, DVLA issued 363,000 summonsesfor VED and vehicle registration offences.

Streamlining processes for minoroffences with guilty pleas

3.42 In the longer term, we will work with theDVLA to streamline the prosecution of lessserious motoring offences. The Agency hasdone some initial work to understand thepossible scope for a system for dealing withless serious and more straightforward motoringoffences, where they can be dealt with outsidecourt sittings.

3.43 The proposal concentrates on thehandling of the high-volume, low-complexitycases, which might best lend them to beinghandled administratively rather than have tobe considered by magistrates. In all cases, the

offender would retain the right for their caseto be heard at court, but where the standardpenalty offered is acceptable to the subject,a straightforward disposal of the offence couldbe delivered efficiently.

3.44 We will also explore the role that DVLAmight play, employing for a wider range ofoffences the Agency’s well-establishedinfrastructure, assets and expertise in the fieldof Vehicle Excise Duty enforcement. The useof wheel clamping, vehicle impounding andintelligence-led enforcement, together witha national network of enforcement officersoperating from the Agency’s 40 local offices,provides further options for dealing with lessserious offences outside the magistrates’courts system.

3.45 Involving DVLA more directly in theadministration and disposal of offences mayalso provide real benefits in the accuracy andthe currency of information held about driversand their vehicles. This would, in turn, have apositive impact on the detection of motoringoffences where enforcing bodies rely onDVLA data.

Driving without insurance

3.46 Driving without insurance is one of themost common motoring offences and also onewhere the offender’s actions are likely to havea significant detrimental impact upon innocentmembers of the public. Professor DavidGreenaway’s report Uninsured Driving in theUnited Kingdom was published in July 2004.The Government is working closely with theinsurance industry and other stakeholders to takeforward his recommendations as appropriate.

3.47 The Government accepted all but three ofProfessor Greenaway’s recommendations. Wehave introduced:

• seizure of vehicles – police now have powersto seize uninsured vehicles, pending productionof a valid certificate (measure introduced bythe Serious Organised Crime and Police Act2005 on 1 July 2005)

• police access to the Motor InsuranceDatabase so they can identify unlicensedvehicles at the roadside (measures introducedby the Serious Organised Crime and PoliceAct 2005 on 1 July 2005)

33


• Government websites – information on therequirements of motor insurance should beavailable through Government websitese.g. Direct.gov. This was completed inJanuary 2005.

• the Road Safety Bill to Parliament, whichcontains proposals to introduce measures fortackling uninsured driving (paragraph 3.55).

We will:

• increase roll-out of ANPR camera teams

• work with the insurance industry todevelop products that price young driversinto the market

• update the Highway Code and Theory Testso that the purpose of and requirement forthird party insurance feature more prominently.

3.48 The Government is committed to tacklingthis crime. There is currently an imbalancebetween the cost of motoring insurance andthe penalties that are commonly awarded tooffenders in these cases.

3.49 The average annual cost of a motorinsurance premium is £370. However, asProfessor Greenaway’s report pointed out, thisfigure is misleading as the typical offender islikely to be young and male with an insurancepremium considerably higher than the average.Public perception often compares the penaltyfor driving without insurance with the annualinsurance premium. It is important to note,however, that an offender can only be prosecutedon the occasion of the offence, unless it canbe proved that the offender has been using anuninsured vehicle for a period of time.

3.50 Critics of the current system rightly pointout that motor insurance premiums are notmeans-tested and question why the penaltiesfor driving without insurance should be so low.The belief is: “If you can’t afford the insurance,you can’t afford to drive: insurance is notoptional”. The Government is determined toensure that, in future, the penalties imposedon offenders will accurately reflect both theseriousness of the offence and the costof insurance.

3.51 Driving without insurance is currentlypunishable by Fixed Penalty Notice of £200.As with other FPNs, an offender can choose to

go to court, or where an offender defaults onpayment, it is automatically converted to a fine50% higher i.e. £300.

3.52 If the offence goes to court, uponconviction magistrates currently have thefollowing sentencing options available tothem in their sentencing guidelines:

• fine of up to £5,000

• obligatory licence endorsement of 6-8 points,or disqualification

• community rehabilitation

• a curfew – up to 12 hours a day for up to6 months

• automatic disqualification upon committal ofa second offence within four years

• imprisonment for driving while disqualified.

3.53 Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003,and available since April 2005, the followingsentencing options have been introduced:

• 12 community sentencing options including,for example, up to 300 hours of unpaid work

• The Management of Offenders and SentencingBill gives provisions to magistrates to enablethem, despite any means test data, to fine upto the Fixed Penalty Notice amount (£200).

3.54 The Road Safety Bill, currently beforeParliament, contains proposals to introduceadditional measures to tackle uninsureddriving. These are:

• a new offence of being the registered keeperof a vehicle, the use of which is not insured

• give an enforcement body powers to enforcethe above offence and to be given access tothe motor insurance database and vehicleregister, to enable it to identify uninsuredvehicles from the record

• that the enforcement body can prosecuteinsurers or policy holders who fail to supplyinformation about insured vehicles, alreadyrequired by law, to the motor insurers’information centre

• that the enforcement body has the powers toissue FPNs, wheel clamp, remove or disposeof uninsured vehicles and prosecute offenders.


34

3.55 In relation to the final measure, DVLA hasalready had these powers for Vehicle ExciseDuty offences and they are proving to be anextremely effective deterrent in ensuringcompliance. In the year beginning September2004, DVLA clamped 38,967 cars of peoplewho failed to comply with orders made againstthem. Of these, 18,113 were subsequentlydisposed of (99% destroyed, 1% sold).

Customer-focussed service

3.56 On 1 April 2005 responsibility for theadministration of all courts, including theownership and management of court buildingswas transferred to HMCS. Prior to this, 42separate Magistrates’ Courts Committees(MCCs) were responsible for the administrationof magistrates’ courts in their area and courtbuildings, in most cases, were the property ofthe relevant local authority.

3.57 HMCS is developing a range of nationalstandards that will be tailored for implementationaccording to local circumstances. Work isalready well underway to identify best practiceacross the former Court Service and MCCs.

3.58 A 5-Year Estates Strategy is beingdeveloped to improve the quality of our courtaccommodation with a particular focus on theneeds of the public. Key features include:

• making the best use of the existing estatethrough renovations and enhancementsbefore embarking on new builds

• a Design Guide that establishes PriorityMinimum Standards against which all buildings,existing and new, will be measured.

• Courts Boards (see para 1.24) will play a rolein developing the plans HMCS will put to theSecretary of State for its estate.

3.59 The Estates Strategy is driven by thedevelopment of the HMCS 5-Year Plan, whichis looking beyond the building portfolio into thepotential for more innovative ways of deliveringthe services that the public expects from amodern court service. These include thefeasibility of mobile court services, and the useof alternative venues for court hearings. It willalso give consideration to whether or not currentcourt opening times are the best and mostconvenient way to provide a public service.

Court security officers

3.60 The public have a right to feel safe whenthey are attending court, especially as a victimor witness.

3.61 Security arrangements in Magistrates’courts are being reviewed together with thecurrent arrangements in the Crown Court andcounty courts. New security policy and guidancewill be issued for consultation in the autumn.

3.62 Following that consultation process, wewill issue a new national manual Safe andSecure: Effective Management of Securitywithin Her Majesty’s Courts Service in early2006 that will outline the minimum securitystandards for all courts and offices. Thismanual will build on the success of Safe andSecure: Guidelines for Effective Security inMagistrates’ Courts.

3.63 On 1 April 2005 we enacted provisions inthe Courts Act 2003 to create Court SecurityOfficers from existing security staff. Courtsecurity officers have new powers to searchall persons seeking to enter a court building,exclude, remove or restrain persons from or inthe court building and request the surrender ofor seize prohibited items.

3.64 We have introduced specific offences ofobstructing and injuring a court security officerwhilst in the execution of their duties. Theycarry maximum penalties of a fine not exceeding£1,000 for obstruction and a maximum of6 months imprisonment or a fine not exceeding£5,000 or both for assault.

3.65 We will also encourage relevantneighbourhood beat officers and/or PoliceCommunity Support Officers (PCSOs) tovisit magistrates’ courts where they exist onparticular policing areas as part of a patrolregime. In this capacity, these officers wouldbe able to deal with specific issues affectingthe courts.

3.66 All courts will be required to undertakean annual risk assessment of the building andfacilities. There will be a requirement in therisk assessment process to seek input frommagistrates, court users and other professionalswho use the court on a regular basis.

35


3.67 The Annual Risk Assessment (ARA) willassess how well the physical building andsecurity services comply with the publishedminimum standards and ensure that interimarrangements are put in place during anyperiod while existing buildings are broughtup to standard.

3.68 The ARA will foster a greater understandingof security issues at a local level and encouragea more joined-up and considered approachto adapting customer services and securityoperations to the reality of the availablephysical resources.

Access to up-to-date information

3.69 To fulfil their role efficiently and effectively,magistrates need to be able to access a vastrange of information quickly. Accurate informationon the means of a defendant is essential ifimmediate consideration of a fine is to bemade, should the defendant be found guilty.In many cases, incomplete and inaccurateinformation leads to maximum financialpenalties being imposed only for the offenderto re-appear in court at a later date to have amore appropriate fine imposed. This wastescourt time, delays the proper disposal ofjustice and leads to unnecessary defaulting.

3.70 The courts need access to othergovernment data systems to be able to verifythe information provided by defendants. Tohelp offenders with wider financial problems,courts need to be able to refer them quicklyto debt advice, and the effectiveness of beingable to take this action immediately is beingtested through community justice initiatives.

3.71 At the time of hearing a case, magistratesmust have available accurate information onpast offences, outstanding warrants and adefendant’s driving and vehicle licence status.

3.72 We have already provided magistrates’courts with access to a credit reference databaseand we are in the process of completing rolloutof access to the Police National Computer andDWP customer information systems. We willlook to establish secure and appropriate linksbetween the IT systems of the courts and thatof the DWP and its agencies, HM Revenueand Customs (including the former InlandRevenue), DVLA, Police and National OffenderManagement Service.

Customer Service Strategy andCharter Mark

3.73 HMCS is committed to a five-yearCustomer Service Strategy designed to putthe public at the heart of everything it does,getting things right the first time and learningfrom any mistakes.

3.74 We will set Customer Service Standardsand these will be published in all court buildingsand on our public websites by March 2006.Standards will address wide-ranging areas suchas court opening times, complaints procedures,use of Plain English, and catering facilities.

3.75 We will also put in place comprehensivecomplaints monitoring procedures and we willconsult the public on the services they mostvalue to inform our future standard-setting.

3.76 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of CourtAdministration (HMICA) replaced Her Majesty’sCourts’ Service Inspectorate (MCSI), witheffect from 1 April 2005. HMICA has a remitto inspect court administration in HMCS andthe Children and Family Court Advisory andSupport Service (CAFCASS). In taking on itswider remit to inspect court administration inCrown, county and magistrates’ courts, HMICAhas decided in the first instance to focus onthe quality of service provided to court users.It has started by looking at the service providedto victims and witnesses, and will then moveonto defendants and jurors. HMICA will alsowork with other criminal justice inspectorateson six joint inspections of criminal justiceareas, and one in Northern Ireland.

3.77 The Charter Mark is the public servicemeasure of customer service excellence. Aswell as being an improvement tool, it providesan assessment framework to measure how weperform for our customers and involve them aswe develop our services in imaginative andeffect ways.

3.78 HMCS has embarked on an ambitious4-year programme to achieve Charter Markaccreditation for each area and ultimatelycorporate accreditation – reflecting our desireto deliver first-class court services.


36

37


Chapter 4: Recruitment and retention of the magistracy

Summary of actions

The Government has:

• Provided every local Advisory Committee with a range of tools and resources,such as advertisements for local papers and radio, to support the recruitmentand selection of new magistrates (para 4.20).

• Established a national freephone number (0800 003 007) for handling enquiriesand issuing application packs on how to become a Magistrate (para 4.25).

• Created a new website on 15 August 2005, dedicated to prospectivecandidates and employers (para 4.22).

• Made substantial improvements to the approval process making it quickerand more flexible (paras 4.27-4.28).

• Established a working party of senior employers groups to address thebarriers that prevent those in full-time employment from taking up the roleof a Magistrate (paras 4.30-4.34).

• Put in place a process whereby the Lord Chancellor will award magistratesof over 20 years standing with certificates for long service (para 4.74).

• Introduced new guidance allowing magistrates to use the post-nominal lettersJP (Justice of the Peace) in all but a few specified circumstances (para 4.77).

• Agreed that the modern magistracy should no longer be referred to as ‘lay’(paras 4.78-4.80).

We will:

• Provide all Advisory Committees with the help of recruitment specialists totarget local employers (para 4.19).

• Provide jurors, on completion of their period of service, with recruitmentmaterial on applying for the magistracy (para 4.26).

• Reduce the time from recommendation to appointment of magistrates from10 to 6 weeks (including a criminal records check) (para 4.28).

• Consult on new arrangements about enabling magistrates to take time offfrom work (para 4.36).

• Consult on the reduction of the minimum sitting requirement of allmagistrates from 26 to 24 half- days (paras 4.50-4.51).

• Develop training programmes, which maximise the opportunities affordedthrough new technologies to deliver training to magistrates in ways that fitwith their other commitments to work and family (paras 4.58-4.69).

• Introduce good practice guidelines for minimising and managing the cancellationof magistrates’ scheduled sittings at short notice (paras 4.72-4.73).

A modern, diverse magistracy

4.1 The work of magistrates and the magistrates’courts is at the very heart of community justicein the country. They deal with nearly 95% ofcriminal cases and around 50,000 family caseseach year. They deal with many of the crimesthat most concern the public including alcohol-related violence, crimes against property andanti-social behaviour.

4.2 The benefit of a volunteer magistracy isthat they are able to represent the views of thecommunity in coming to their decisions. This ismatched by a highly professional approach todischarging their responsibilities.

4.3 In order to ensure that the magistracyis able to continue to fulfil this critical role,the Government believes that the magistracyneeds to reflect the make-up of the communityin terms of age, gender and ethnicity. This chaptersets out our plans for achieving this by 2010.

4.4 District judges, formerly known asStipendiary Magistrates, also play a criticalrole in the magistrates’ courts. Magistratesand district judges bring their own particularbenefits and the courts are stronger throughthe availability of both judicial branches. It isimportant that the majority of magistrates’court work continues to fall to magistrates,supported by district judges appointed forEngland and Wales to sit in the larger courtsand where their professional skills are requiredfor a complex or demanding case. We mustensure we have the best mechanisms inplace to enable them to share their respectiveskills and experiences. For example, there ispotential for district judges (magistrates) toshare their experience of more complex caseswith magistrates.

4.5 The appointment of magistrates iscurrently made by the Secretary of State forConstitutional Affairs (in his capacity as LordChancellor), on advice of local AdvisoryCommittees. Advisory Committees consist ofrepresentatives from the magistracy and otherlay members who recruit, interview andrecommend suitable candidates to the LordChancellor. The involvement of local people inthe recruitment of magistrates is an essentialelement in ensuring the magistracy trulyreflects its local community.

Magistrates’ NationalRecruitment Strategy

4.6 In October 2003 the Lord Chancellorlaunched the Magistrates’ National RecruitmentStrategy (MNRS) and as part of that strategypublished research in September 2004 thatexamined the barriers to recruitment andretention of magistrates. Its findings weresupported by the underlying concerns putforward through the Supporting MagistratesProgramme’s communication exercise.

Public misconceptions

4.7 The MNRS and Support Magistrates toProvide Justice research drew up consistentfindings:

• The public viewed magistrates as mostlywhite, older, middle-class and professional(even those who were themselves consideringbecoming a magistrate).

• There was a strong expectation that amagistrate needed to have a formal universityeducation. Few people appreciated that theposition was voluntary and no qualificationsare required.

• There was little knowledge of the level ofcommitment required or of the applicationprocess.

• Although 9 out of 10 people said they hadheard of magistrates, fewer than one in six ofthese claimed to know a lot about them15.

• Awareness and knowledge of magistrates isconsiderably higher amongst certain groupsof the population16. Knowledge of magistratesis higher for older age groups, with a peak at55-65. Knowledge of the magistracy is alsohigher among people in professional andmanagerial occupations.

• 14% of 18-24 year olds say they have neverheard of magistrates and a further 43% saythey have heard of magistrates but theyknow nothing about them.

• Levels of knowledge of magistrates are loweramong the BME population, particularlyamong Asians17.


38

15, 16, 17 Source: DCA Consumer Strategy “National Survey on CJS Engagement”.

• 35% of Asians said they had never heardof magistrates, compared to 24% amongthe black population and 6% of the whitepopulation.

• People who said they would be “very interested”in working as a magistrate were twice aslikely to say they “knew a lot about it” thanthose who said they had “no interest”.

The magistracy and the community

4.8 The Government believes that themagistracy’s local membership should reflectthe composition of the communities it serves.The statistics below demonstrate that theexisting level of diversity is widely proportionatewith the rest of the population in terms ofgender and race, but the Government wouldlike to see more applications to the magistracyfrom younger, working people. The Governmentis committed to equality of opportunity andjudicial diversity.

4.9 The barriers experienced by some peoplewhen putting themselves forward for themagistracy must be addressed, especiallyfor those in full-time employment and thosewho simply do not see the magistracy as apersonal option.

More magistrates in some areas

4.10 There are more than 28,000 magistratesin England and Wales. The Governmentwelcomes the efforts that have been made toensure that the work of the courts continuesin those areas with a shortage of magistrates.But we recognise that there is more to be doneto ensure every area has the required numbersof local magistrates. Some areas have adequatenumbers of magistrates to share the workof the courts e.g. Warwickshire, but otherareas have too few magistrates, e.g. London.We will target action on those areas facingthe greatest problems.

4.11 The workload of the courts varies overtime. Recent initiatives such as increasingthe numbers of offenders brought to justice,changes to court procedures and proposalssuch as those outlined in Chapter 3 will allhave an impact on the levels of business inthe courts. Local areas require robust businessprojection models, specific to their particularneeds. These will support the Advisory Committeein setting targets for the future requirement oftheir local magistracy.

39

Supporting Magistrates’ Courts to Provide Justice | Recruitment and retention of the magistracy

Figure 3: Composition of the magistracy

Age Gender Ethnic background

18-40 40-49 50-59 60-69 Male Female White Asian Black Other Not known

988 4,377 11,754 11,181 14,273 14,027 26,401 952 626 249 72

3.5% 15.5% 41.5% 39.5% 50.4% 49.6% 93.3% 3.4% 2.2% 0.9% 0.3%

England and Wales Population (2001 Census)18

46.4% 20.3% 19.2% 14.1% 48.7% 51.3% 90.9% 4.6% 2.3% 0.9% 1.3%

18 Source of data: age and gender statistics are from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/, ethnic background dataare from the Commission for Racial Equality.

4.12 Since the launch of the MNRS in 2003,recruitment to the magistracy has increasedeach year by nearly 10% on the previous year’srecruitment. But there are still some parts ofthe country that are having difficulty in recruitingthe numbers they need. To address this deficit,we will seek to identify the profile of how manymagistrates we will require in the next 5 yearsand target our actions in those areas ofgreatest need.

The way forward

4.13 The modern day magistracy has manystrengths. It is community-based and increasinglydrawn from all social backgrounds. We buildon those strengths while making theimprovements and changes needed to ensurethat the magistracy is equipped to meet thechallenge of effectively delivering justice in a21st century democracy.

4.14 There are three key areas that wewill address:

• Recruiting more magistrates. We willrecruit more by identifying the numbersof magistrates each area needs, ensuringwe broaden the pool of people applying to

become magistrates and, when peopleapply, have in place efficient and effectiverecruitment practices, appropriate trainingand on-going support.

• Representative of the community. In manyaspects, particularly with regard to gender,the magistracy is reflective of the widercommunity. There are three areas we will makeprogress on: reducing the age profile of themagistracy, recruiting more magistrates inemployment and recruiting more magistratesfrom Black and Minority Ethnic (BME)communities.

• Magistracy supported by employers. We willwork to ensure that employers recognise thetangible benefits to their business of employingmagistrates, and to support employees whotake on the important duties of a magistrate.

Supporting Advisory Committees

4.15 Advisory Committees are currentlyresponsible for the recruitment of magistrates.They too are made up of public volunteers andgive a great deal of their time to this role.

4.16 We will improve support to AdvisoryCommittees so that they are able to attract,select and appoint people into the Magistracyfrom the widest pool possible.

4.17 The magistracy has to compete hardfor new volunteers, not just within the justicesystem, but also against other sectors suchas education and sports, organisations suchas the Citizens Advice and positions such asSchool Governorships.

4.18 We have developed new materials toadvertise the concept of the magistracy tothe widest possible audience and in August2005 produced new application materials forthose embarking on the process of becominga magistrate.

4.19 The key features of the new material andthe related recruitment processes are:

• a consistent identity, nationwide, that hasbeen thoroughly researched and tested

• a communication toolkit that will allow everyAdvisory Committee to plan a campaignaccording to local need within a consistentgeneric framework


40

You Decide: Become a Magistrate – the key message of a new media campaign produced by DCA to recruit more magistrates

• a portfolio of materials that includes informationspecifically aimed at employers

• a new, more streamlined process to enableAdvisory Committees to access supportand advice from professional expertise andDCA for their campaigns. For example, ouradvisors will help Committees to bettertarget local employers.

4.20 The Government has provided all AdvisoryCommittees with a range of professionallydeveloped advertisement and recruitmentmaterials. They have been issued with acommunications toolkit that includes:

• templates of press advertisements

• posters

• advertisements for use on local radio

• articles for placing in local newspapers and

• ideas on how to work with local communitygroups and employers.

4.21 Employer representative groups, includingthe Confederation of British Industry, Institute ofDirectors and Federation of Small Businesses,have welcomed this new material and havecommended it for its professional approach.

4.22 The material is complemented by a newwebsite www.magistrates.gov.uk for magistratesand those interested in the work of the magistracy.It also includes a section specifically aimedat employers and potential employers ofmagistrates.

4.23 We are working with the Magistrates’Association to ensure that anyone consideringbecoming a magistrate has the opportunity totalk to an existing member of the magistracyabout the role.

4.24 We are also developing a six-monthnational campaign to target employers, usingdirect mail and advertising in a selection ofbroadsheet newspapers and popular businesspublications. Local Advisory Committees maywish to consider complementing paid advertisingwith presentations to local community groupsand television or radio interviews.

4.25 We have already established a nationalfreephone number (0800 003 007) to manageinitial enquiries from potential magistrates.

4.26 Finally, we will be providing people whohave completed jury service with informationabout becoming a magistrate. Jury serviceoffers a unique insight into the criminal courtprocess. Evidence from our consumer researchconfirms that those who have served on a juryhad a better understanding and knowledge ofmagistrates’ work because they could imaginewhat kind of work magistrates would do. Manymight welcome the opportunity to serve theircommunity through further involvement in thecriminal justice system. We will provide the CrownCourt with specifically designed recruitmentinformation that will be made available tojurors on completion of their service.

Appointing new magistrates

4.27 The Government undertook a full reviewof the appointment process in March 2005. Asa result, we have removed the requirement forAdvisory Committees to provide submissionsat single fixed points during the year. AdvisoryCommittees are now free to submitrecommendations at any time. This will reducethe length of time between candidates completingthe Advisory Committee’s recruitment proceduresand, if successful, their formal appointment bythe Lord Chancellor.

4.28 We have also reviewed every stage ofour internal procedures and have institutedchanges. The period of time from the receipt ofa recommendation from the Advisory Committeeto notification to the Advisory Committee ofsuccess (or otherwise) has been reduced fromon average ten weeks to six weeks, whichincludes a Criminal Records Bureau check.We continue to look for further efficiencies inthat process.

4.29 The independent Judicial AppointmentsCommission (JAC) will be launched in April 2006.Once it is fully established and operational,responsibility for the appointment processwill transfer from the Lord Chancellor to theCommission, improving transparency andaccountability.

Working with employers

4.30 The Lord Chancellor has established aworking group to identify ways to address thechallenges faced by employed magistrates,including difficulties in getting time off work. Thisconcern was consistent amongst the existingmagistracy during the communications exercise.

41


4.31 The working group includesrepresentatives of:

• the Institute of Directors

• the Confederation of British Industry

• Trades Union Congress

• Business in the Community

• Federation of Small Businesses

• the Judicial Studies Board

• the Magistrates’ Association.

4.32 The purpose of the working group is:

• “To provide expert input to inform thedirection of the Government’s commitmentto forge a partnership with employers onincreasing employer support for workingMagistrates.”

4.33 The group’s work is to address thefollowing key themes:

• increasing the visibility of magistrates inthe workplace

• emphasising the benefits and value ofthe training

• ensuring support at the top reaches downthe management chain

• encouraging flexibility on both sides

• further research on the issues

• finding practical solutions that meet theneeds of business.

4.34 A number of proposals have emergedfrom the group’s discussion including:

• encouragement for large employers to setup a forum/interest group for employees whoare magistrates and guidance for employersthrough the process of supporting a volunteergroup in their business

• joining an existing forum for younger peopleand volunteering

• the establishment of a network to effectivelychannel information to employers

• HMCS should take part in the Business inthe Community Awards to help supportmagistrates as part of many companies’advocacy of corporate social responsibility.

4.35 The existing legislation on time off lacksclarity and is open to misinterpretation. TheGovernment recognises that a change toaddress this is desirable. Under the 1996Employment Act, it is for the employer todetermine what constitutes ‘reasonable’ timeoff. The criteria on which that decision shouldbe based [Section 50(4)] are very difficult fornon-lawyers to interpret. Evidence suggeststhat in a significant number of instancesmagistrates are refused sufficient time off.More often than not, this seems to be owing toa misunderstanding of the requirement to granttime off rather than deliberate intransigence onthe part of the employer.

4.36 We are considering an alternative provision,with a procedure the same as that which existsunder Section 47 of the Employment Act 2002dealing with flexible working for parents ofchildren under 6 or disabled children. Thislegislation is much clearer and easier tointerpret. It also sets out clear and workablerequirements on both the employer and theemployee in terms of how the request for timeoff shall be made and determined, including arequirement to give reasons for a refusal. Thiswould reduce the potential for misunderstandingand misinterpretation inherent in the 1996 Act.Finally, the 2002 Act is designed to avoiddisagreements escalating to legal proceedings,for example with its provision for internal appeals.

A magistracy that reflects itscommunity

4.37 There are two key elements to creatinga more representative magistracy. The first isengagement and aims to raise awareness ofwhat magistrates do and who can become amagistrate. It involves emphasising the valueof magistrates to society, and showing whatthe individuals who become magistrates gainfrom it.

4.38 Secondly, becoming a magistrate mustbe a realistic option for all sectors of thecommunity. Younger people, those in full-timeemployment and people from black and ethnicminority communities often do not feel ableto become a magistrate. These groups arecurrently under represented in the magistracy.


42

Black and minority ethnic magistrates

4.39 Nationally, the proportion of magistratesfrom Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) communitiesaligns with the overall population. Around7% of all magistrates come from the BMEcommunities, making the magistracy only slightlyunder-representative of the wider populationwhere 8% come from BME communities.However, there are individual benches that needmore support to ensure the level of ethnicrepresentation in the magistracy is significantlymore reflective of the local population. Examplesof where we need more BME magistrates are:London, Liverpool and Avon.

4.40 The MNRS Implementation Paper gaveAdvisory Committees’ guidance on areas thathave been identified as needing to recruit agreater proportion of ethnic minority candidates.To help the Advisory Committees, we aredeveloping a national protocol for their useon how best to engage with their local BMEcommunities. One measure we have alreadyundertaken is the introduction of the MagistratesShadowing Scheme, a recruitment programmefirst launched in 2001 specifically to targetBME communities. We will consider how elsewe might be able to support the Committees –potentially through a diversity awarenesstraining programme.

4.41 The Magistrates Shadowing Scheme isrun in partnership with Operation Black Voteand the Magistrates’ Association. It enablespeople from BME communities to gain directexperience of the work magistrates do andhow the criminal justice system works at alocal level. One of the key elements of theScheme is that participants are asked to holdmeetings in the communities to share theirexperiences. www.obv.org.uk/Magistrate/2003/

4.42 Over the next five years the Governmentwill focus engagement on those areas wheregreater ethnic diversity is needed. This willbe supported by our general commitment tosubstantially increase awareness of the role andvalue of our magistrates. This is particularlyimportant in the light of the findings highlightedin the DCA’s consumer research.

More, younger magistrates

4.43 Redressing the age imbalance on theBench is particularly important. The Governmentis grateful for the contribution of older and moreexperienced magistrates. However, a significant

proportion of existing magistrates will reachjudicial retirement age shortly. We need torecruit a new generation of magistrates to meetthe demands placed on the magistrates’ courts.

4.44 In recent years, it has become increasinglydifficult to recruit magistrates in their 30s and40s and we will take action to remedy this.Exceptional candidates may apply to becomea Magistrate at eighteen years of age. However,typically most people will be in their thirtieswhen they consider applying.

4.45 A key characteristic of present daysociety is the ever-increasing demand onyounger people’s time. Many of the brightand capable people we need to attract to themagistracy are already juggling the commitmentsof time-consuming careers, family lives and avariety of leisure pursuits. We need to makethe magistracy a more viable option to youngerpeople. For example, we are consultingemployers’ organisations about what might bea reasonable sitting pattern for younger peoplein employment. We will also consult on openingup the CJS Law Scholarship to applicants tothe magistrates’ bench. If evidence suggeststhat this offer will succeed in widening the poolof prospective candidates, we will considerhow we might advertise these opportunitiesappropriately.

Lawyer magistrates applying tothe judiciary

4.46 As part of our programme to increasejudicial diversity, we will be making a limitedexception to the established policy that no oneis appointed to salaried judicial office withoutfirst having served in a fee-paid post. We willallow solicitors and barristers who sit asmagistrates to use their JP sittings in lieu offee-paid sittings when applying for salariedjudicial office. The details of this policy continueto be worked through with a working group ofkey stakeholders.

4.47 In normal circumstances, lawyers whoare magistrates will continue to need fee-paidexperience before being able to apply forsalaried judicial office. They will, like otherlawyers who meet the statutory eligibilitycriteria, need to successfully complete theselection procedure to become a deputydistrict judge and gain experience in that role.We are currently considering, with the benefitof stakeholders’ views, the amount of fee-paidsitting experience which would be required

43


before such a person could then apply in anopen competition for salaried judicial office(in other words, to what extent their magistratesittings would be counted in lieu of fee-paidsittings). However, in exceptional cases, it willbe possible for such a person to be able toapply for salaried judicial office without havingfirst sat as a fee-paid judge. We are currentlyconsidering how to define such exceptionalcircumstances.

Sittings requirements

4.48 Magistrates currently sit in half-day sessions,with each court session lasting approximatelytwo and a half hours. Courts usually conducta morning and an afternoon sitting.

4.49 We need to ensure there is the rightbalance between sitting requirements andrecognising the other demands that peopleface, such as work and family life.

4.50 The Government believes that eachmagistrate should sit a minimum number oftimes each year so that they can build theirexperience and maintain their competence.The current minimum of 26 half-day sittingsper year represents a high level of commitment.This may act as a deterrent for some peopleand make it difficult for existing membersof the magistracy to continue in the role,especially as magistrates also give additionaltime voluntarily to attend mandatory andoptional training sessions.

4.51 To ease this burden, we are consulting onthe feasibility of reducing the minimum numberof sittings to 24. We consider that this mightbe a more appropriate minimum to ensure thateach magistrate maintains their competenciesbut has more time to receive the current training.In doing this, it is hoped to broaden out theaccessibility of the magistracy to younger,working people.

4.52 In practice, almost all magistrates sitmore than the minimum. The DCA currentlysets each Advisory Committee a targetaverage number of sittings of 35. This figurehas been used by Advisory Committees tohelp determine the total number of magistratesrequired for each bench.

4.53 The use of such an arbitrary average failsto account for differing needs and availabilityof each magistrate. A magistrate in full-timeemployment is most likely to be able to sit,

on average, fewer days than a magistrate whohas retired from paid work. Therefore, we willremove the requirement for Advisory Committeesto achieve an overall average sitting.

4.54 The strength of the magistracy lies in thefact that it is made up of people who have otherroles and responsibilities in their community asemployees or business people, carers, homemakers or parents, students and volunteers.Not all these people can sit for the sameamount of time.

4.55 In order to ensure that the bench is asrepresentative as possible and that the samepeople are not sitting all the time we are, aspart of a wider consultation, consideringwhether a maximum annual sitting requirementof 60 half-days would be appropriate.

4.56 Minimum and maximum annualsittings will help to ensure the magistracy isrepresentative and that all magistrates havesufficient opportunity to gain the experiencethey need to be most effective. They shouldalso provide a more effective basis on whichto determine the total numbers of magistratesrequired on each bench.

Flexible time for sittings

4.57 Where practical arrangements can bemade with other key CJS agencies, we mustintroduce greater flexibility in when magistratesare required to sit. The opening hours forcourts will be subject to minimum standardsof 5 hours per day, for each day that they areopen, usually from 10am to 4pm with an hourfor lunch. These standards will not restrictindividual courts and/or local areas fromopening their courts outside of these hours

Flexible training of magistrates

4.58 Since 1 April 2005 the Judicial StudiesBoard (JSB) has taken on a strengthened rolefor magistrates’ training in conjunction withHer Majesty’s Courts Service. The newarrangements will see greater consistencyin the content and manner of training acrossEngland and Wales, supporting the local deliveryof magistrate training by justices’ clerks.

4.59 The Magistrates National TrainingInitiative 2 (MNTI 2) is a more refined, lesscomplex weighted set of competencies formagistrates, supported by clear nationalstandards. The JSB has established systems


44

to ensure that the appraisal of magistratestakes place in a timely and effective manneracross the country.

4.60 Magistrates are required to undertaketraining before sitting as a justice in the adultcourt, as a chairman in the adult court, and asa justice and chairman in the youth and familyproceedings courts. This is the only compulsorytraining that magistrates must undertake.

4.61 There is a great deal of other trainingoffered to magistrates. None of this training iscompulsory, in the sense that magistrates whodo not undertake it are not removed or unableto sit. However, the training is intended tosupport a magistrate’s competence. TheBench Training and Development Committee(BTDC) appraises magistrates, so if the failureto attend training had resulted in a magistratefailing to demonstrate competence, the BTDCcould require him or her to re-train.

4.62 MNTI 2 places greater emphasis on therequired skills and behaviours, whilst alsodefining the underpinning knowledge neededby magistrates. The important key themes ofdiversity and equality are integrated withinthe scheme.

4.63 MNTI 2 is an important tool for securingthe effectiveness and credibility of judicialdecision-making; it is a key support for thenew Magistrates’ National RecruitmentScheme; and it supports the wider objectivesof the criminal justice system.

4.64 The JSB exercises judicial oversight andkey responsibilities for the training of magistrateson behalf of the Lord Chancellor. From 1 April2006 the Lord Chancellor’s responsibility fortraining the judiciary will transfer to the LordChief Justice (as a consequence of theConstitutional Reform Act 2005).

4.65 Magistrates are inducted with acomprehensive training programme at the timeof appointment, and all magistrates receiveappraisal through a rigorous competenceframework. Regular training sessions ensurethat all magistrates are kept abreast of changesin the criminal justice system. Magistratesvoluntarily give their time to meet theserequirements in addition to exercising theirjudicial functions.

4.66 The JSB will work with Her Majesty’s CourtsService to improve and widen magistrates’access to training. Training materials will be

designed so that they can be used flexibly tomeet the needs of individual magistrates atarea level. Where appropriate use will bemade of hard-copy distance learning materials,self-study packs and e-communications viainternet links and DVDs.

4.67 Magistrates and justices’ clerks will beinvolved in the development and design oftraining programmes. Through its monitoringand evaluation function, the JSB will identifygood practice in training provision, enablingmagistrate trainers to learn from the experienceof colleagues and magistrates in other areas.

4.68 The Sector Skills Development Agencywill make funding available to Skills for Justice,via SkillsActive (the Sector Skills Council forActive Leisure and Learning), to develop andimprove links with voluntary and communityorganisations in the sector.

4.69 Skills for Justice will provide support andadvice, enabling the voluntary and communitysectors to be more fully represented in Skillsfor Justice research, skills needs assessmentand sector skills agreements.

Supporting commitment tothe magistracy

4.70 The responses to our communicationsexercise indicated that magistrates fullyunderstand the essential role they play indelivering local justice. Responses frommagistrates revealed an acknowledgementthat the contribution their service makes tothe community is often its own reward.

4.71 The Government is grateful for the effortsexisting magistrates have made in rearrangingbusy personal schedules and juggling otherresponsibilities in order to be available to sit.Magistrates are entitled to have this commitmentsuitably recognised and respected by theGovernment and the public.

4.72 Whilst sitting schedules are establishedwell in advance of the day a court sits, it isinevitable that from time to time a magistratewill not be able to sit when scheduled forreasons beyond their control. It will also bethe case that, despite the best practices of thecourt, there will be times when a scheduledbench will not be required to sit and will becancelled at relatively short notice.

45


4.73 The Chief Executive of HMCS and theSenior Presiding Judge will, however, issuegood practice guidance on the cancellation ofmagistrates’ courts. The guidance will establishstandards for each courts area and their localjudiciary, requiring them to produce transparentand agreed mechanisms for keeping thesesituations to a minimum, and effectivelymanaging them according to local needs.

Recognising long service and titles

4.74 In addition to the day-to-day commitmentmade by the magistracy, the Governmentappreciates the commitment made by a greatmany magistrates who selflessly serve theircommunity, year on year. In recognition of theircontribution to the justice system, the Governmentwill introduce a long-service certificate to beawarded by the Lord Chancellor to all magistrateswho have served for 20 years or more, inaddition to the existing arrangements wherebythe Lord Chancellor sends a personal letter of thanks to magistrates on their judicialretirement at 70.

4.75 It has long been the rule that the post-nominal letters JP, which stand for Justice ofthe Peace, can only be used after a magistrate’sname in very specific circumstances. Since2001 it has been limited to being used directlyin connection with magisterial duties.

4.76 The fact that an individual is a magistrateis, however, a matter of public record.Magistrates are right to feel honoured abouttheir status and what it says about them.Moreover, there is a need to raise publicawareness of the wide range of people whohold this office.

4.77 The Government acknowledges thatconcern on the part of magistrates that theycould inadvertently fall foul of the rules hasmeant many magistrates simply never use thepost-nominal letters JP. We have thereforerelaxed these rules and have issued a circularproviding clear guidance to magistrates, AdvisoryCommittees, justices’ clerks and Benchchairpersons on how the letters may be used.

4.78 The term lay magistrate has historicallybeen used in part to distinguish Justices of thePeace from the district judges. It has also beenused to convey the fact that magistrates are notrequired to be members of the legal profession.

4.79 The Government acknowledges that theuse of the word ‘lay’ fails to properly conveythe conscientious and professional attitude ofthe magistracy. Magistrates undergo extensivetraining and continual and rigorous post-appointment appraisal.

4.80 We will not change legislation relating tothe definition of Justice of the Peace, but it willbe Departmental policy that, when referringto Justices of the Peace as magistrates, theprefix ‘lay’ will no longer be used.


46

Conclusion

Much achieved – much more to do

5.1 Magistrates and magistrates’ courts havea critical role to play in the delivery of justice.They are at the forefront of delivering local,community-based justice and are responsiblefor handling the vast majority of all criminalcases in this country.

5.2 Of course they do not and cannotfunction alone. It is only when all the partiesinvolved in the criminal justice system worktogether that we will deliver justice efficiently,effectively and in a way that restores thepublic’s confidence.

5.3 We are determined to support magistratesand magistrates’ courts in their vital work. Weasked what could be done to help magistratesand court staff fulfil their duties and ultimately toimprove services to the public. We are gratefulto everyone who took the time to respond.

5.4 As a result we have, in this report,proposed changes to:

• methods of engaging with our communities

• court procedures and services

• court environment and security and

• magistrate recruitment practices.

5.5 We can only make these changes withthe support and collaboration of our colleaguesacross the justice system. Some of them willrequire legislation that will be brought forwardas soon as parliamentary time allows.

5.6 There are many great stories to tell aboutlocal justice and the valuable work of the courts.But we cannot be complacent. Excellentpractice and great achievements sit alongsideareas of poor performance. Too often, casesdo not proceed for avoidable reasons – greatlyinconveniencing witnesses and victims andwasting the resources of the court and allothers involved in the case. Justice delayed isjustice denied. We are determined to improvestandards across the board, for magistrates,district judges, court staff and, above all, thelaw-abiding public.

5.7 This report sets out how we have respondedto the views expressed during our extensivecommunications exercise and the changingcircumstances in which the magistracy andthose working in magistrates’ courts fulfil theirresponsibilities. It also sets out our proposalsfor further changes and reforms.

5.8 But it is not the end of the story. Thereis a great deal more to do. We will continue tolook for ways to improve our services so thatthey are as efficient and effective as possible,making best use of the capacity of the courts,as well as the talent and expertise of thoseworking in them.

5.9 We look forward to continuing the highlyproductive working partnerships that led to thisreport and will lead to further improvements inthe future.

47


If you have any queries or comments regarding this document or any other part of theSM2PJ programme, please contact the SM2PJ team at [email protected] write to:

SM2PJ Programme TeamDepartment for Constitutional Affairs11 Tothill StreetLondon SW1H 9LJ


48

Printed in the UK for the Stationery Office Limitedon behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office

182551 11/05 AM4298

supporting magistrates - official documents

Documents