Fight for Juries

On 19 February 2026, I joined a number of criminal practitioners and legal professionals for a very candidate debate about the Fight for Juries event hosted by the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association (LCCSA) at the offices of Hodge Jones & Allen.

Attending in my capacity as President of the Society of Asian Lawyers, I was struck by the depth of engagement and the strength of feeling in the room. This was also notable for the scores of attendees who joined online. The commitment to safeguarding the integrity of our justice system was unmistakable.

Expertly moderated by Zachary Whyte (LCCSA’s Vice President), the panel delivered powerful insights and serious concerns about the Government’s proposal to restrict jury trials.

Jason Lartey, President of LCCSA opened with a clear and unequivocal rejection of the proposed restrictions. His message was clear – there will be no compromise, no surrender.

Rebecca Helm, Professor of Law and Empirical of Legal Studies at University of Exeter highlighted the dangers of concentrating decision‑making in the hands of a narrow elite whose experiences do not reflect wider society and stating that the role of juries includes the interpretation of law and standards of accountability in society by ordinary and decent person.  Crucially, she reminded us that we cannot quantify what is lost – or could be lost – if jury trials are curtailed.

Katy Hanson, Chair of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association (“CLSA”), confirmed that its membership firmly opposes any curbing of jury trials, including the introduction of intermediary court pilot schemes. She feared that if a pilot scheme was brought in, there would be grave difficulty in seeking its abolishment.   

Andrew Thomas KC, Vice President of The Criminal Bar Association (“CBA”), provided a statistical breakdown of Crown Court work pointing out that 35% of Crown Court work is not trial based; 45% is indictable only offences; 20% was either way offence – with only 10% of Crown Court work being impacted by these changes and the real positive impact being much more nominal. He also emphasised that nothing inspires public confidence in the criminal justice system more than being judged by a jury of one’s peers.

Chris Henley KC, former Chair of The Criminal Bar Association raised serious concerns about race and class bias within the judiciary, stressing that trial by jury remains the only part of the criminal justice system that delivers fair and consistent decisions. He highlighted that in the Post Office scandal, postmasters/postmistresses of Asian and Black heritage received harsher sentences than their white counter-parts, and pointing to the harsh sentence imposed upon the now Seema Misra OBE. Chris also told an anecdote about Sir Brian Leveson’s experience as a young prosecutor, in respect of the comedian, Ken Dodd who was found with large quantity of cash in his home and stood trial for tax evasion in 1989 – suffice to say the jury acquitted Mr Dodd.   

The collective and vehement opposition to replacing juries with judge‑only or hybrid panels was palpable, reflecting the position of criminal practitioner organisations across the board.

I had the opportunity to speak to many criminal practitioners who all expressed concern, confusion and frustration.

Significant work is already underway by LCCSA, CLSA, CBA and other criminal practitioner bodies in preparing responses to the Government’s attempt to fast‑track these proposals.

The Society of Asian Lawyers will continue to collaborate closely with the LCCSA and partner organisations to ensure the voices of SAL members are heard clearly and acted upon. We continue our work with stakeholders including The Law Society.

With the Government being steadfast in its attempt to fast track the erosion of constitutional rights under the guise that the election of jury trials has caused the significant delay in the delivery of justice rather than face the reality that the significant backlog of 80,000 cases in the Crown Court are the cause of years of underfunding and investment by consecutive governments in our criminal justice system is extremely concerning.

As the legal profession, we “wield the pen” and we, collectively, are mightier than the Government’s “sword”.

We must stand together.

We must stand firm.

We must do all in our power to protect constitutional rights.    

If you are a SAL member who may be affected by these proposed changes, or if you wish to share your views or concerns, please contact me directly in confidence and write to us at secretary@societyofasianlawyers.co.uk

Muntech Kaur

President, Society of Asian Lawyers

Muntech Kaur – President of Society of Asian Lawyers and Jason Lartey – President of London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association