Within all the competing arguments over the removal of some defendants` rights to a jury trial one consideration has been conspicuous [to me at least] by its absence: the comparative costs of lay magistrates and District Judges. There have been few if any financial comparisons in this century between the court costs of a magistrates bench and those of a single District Judge. The general conclusion of a cost comparison between magistrates and District Judges that dates from the early 2000s was that lay magistrates remain cheaper in direct payroll terms but the Department for Constitutional Affairs concluded that magistrates were still cheaper though not dramatically so once full courtroom costs were considered.
District Judges remain more expensive individually but more autonomous and efficient. The difference is material but not overwhelming. The debate is or should be less about pounds and more about principle. A lay courtroom might cost approximately £110,000–£120,000 annually in judicial staffing terms (Legal Adviser plus allowances and clerical support). A District Judge courtroom might cost around £200,000 per year. The differential can therefore be estimated at £70,000–£90,000 per courtroom annually.
A scenario rarely publicly explored is if lay magistrates were confined to non-custodial cases and District Judges reserved exclusively for custodial matters the additional cost would be measurable but contained. There are 1.3 - 1.4 million cases progressed annually through the lower courts system. If roughly 130,000–150,000 custodial cases per year were allocated exclusively to District Judges and each judge disposed of around 1,000 cases annually, approximately 130–150 additional full-time DJs would be required. Unpublished research seems to point to the exclusion of lay magistrates altogether adding £25-£30 million to current court costs. However when fixed costs are factored in that number is reduced. With AI on the horizon productivity within all courts is likely to improve but the question remains as to what will be or should be sacrificed to attain that position.
Cost analysis cannot be confined to judicial salaries. Some empirical research has suggested that District Judges impose custodial sentences at marginally higher rates in certain offence categories than lay magistrates. If accurate the fiscal implications are substantial but the real question is not purely fiscal. It is constitutional. How much value is placed on community participation in justice and how much on professional consistency in decisions affecting liberty? The price of summary justice can be calculated. Its character is a matter of principle. It is clearly apparent that despite propaganda from MOJ local justice is a phantom. District Judges are not appointed to be local. The idea of local justice is a left over from the era of a century ago when there was indeed a society that was local in its outlook, its spiritual and physical needs, its cohesion, its supplies. And not overlooking the fact that that society finally withered after 1945.
There comes to mind the old adage: knowing the price of a service but not its value. That truly applies to those who have been responsible for imposing change wanted or not wanted upon us affecting the very fabric of our society including our system of justice.
A scenario rarely publicly explored is if lay magistrates were confined to non-custodial cases and District Judges reserved exclusively for custodial matters the additional cost would be measurable but contained. There are 1.3 - 1.4 million cases progressed annually through the lower courts system. If roughly 130,000–150,000 custodial cases per year were allocated exclusively to District Judges and each judge disposed of around 1,000 cases annually, approximately 130–150 additional full-time DJs would be required. Unpublished research seems to point to the exclusion of lay magistrates altogether adding £25-£30 million to current court costs. However when fixed costs are factored in that number is reduced. With AI on the horizon productivity within all courts is likely to improve but the question remains as to what will be or should be sacrificed to attain that position.
Cost analysis cannot be confined to judicial salaries. Some empirical research has suggested that District Judges impose custodial sentences at marginally higher rates in certain offence categories than lay magistrates. If accurate the fiscal implications are substantial but the real question is not purely fiscal. It is constitutional. How much value is placed on community participation in justice and how much on professional consistency in decisions affecting liberty? The price of summary justice can be calculated. Its character is a matter of principle. It is clearly apparent that despite propaganda from MOJ local justice is a phantom. District Judges are not appointed to be local. The idea of local justice is a left over from the era of a century ago when there was indeed a society that was local in its outlook, its spiritual and physical needs, its cohesion, its supplies. And not overlooking the fact that that society finally withered after 1945.
There comes to mind the old adage: knowing the price of a service but not its value. That truly applies to those who have been responsible for imposing change wanted or not wanted upon us affecting the very fabric of our society including our system of justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment