Westminster update: urgent question on jury trial reforms

ECHR is no barrier to immigration reform

Understand our view that immigration reform can work within the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – and what this means for the UK’s approach.

Urgent question on proposed jury trial reforms

On Monday 8 December, shadow lord chancellor Robert Jenrick tabled an urgent question on the government’s proposals to limit access to jury trials.

The discussion highlighted our concerns about the measure and our engagement with the government on wider court reform.

Jenrick argued that the jury reforms were being introduced on “false pretences”, noting regional variations in court backlogs and suggesting the reforms would not address delays in rape cases.

He also highlighted the Leveson review, which had called for further analysis of the impact such changes may have on trial length.

Justice minister Sarah Sackman KC responded that it is broadly recognised that the justice system is not operating as it should.

She referenced increased sitting days, expanded magistrates’ court powers and investment in legal aid as part of wider efforts to boost capacity.

Sackman noted that the government is acting on the Leveson review’s recommendation to create a dedicated Crown Court bench division to expedite cases.

Justice Committee chair Andy Slaughter said trial reforms should be evidence-based and the government needs to provide clearer justification for the proposals.

Sackman confirmed that an impact assessment would accompany the legislation and pointed to the evidence base provided by the independent review of the criminal courts.

She noted that magistrates’ court trials currently conclude around four times faster on average than those in the Crown Court.

Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Jess Brown-Fuller said many MPs believed restricting jury trials would not reduce delays and questioned why the government was prioritising these reforms over wider issues of court mismanagement.

Sackman said the Law Society and other stakeholders had engaged closely with the Leveson review and were in ongoing discussions with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

Paul Kohler highlighted the Law Society president’s earlier comments on court inefficiencies and asked what steps were being taken to address them.

Sackman restated the government’s focus on increasing sitting days alongside further reforms.

Parliamentary group discusses how to improve justice for women and girls

On Tuesday 9 December, the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Legal and Constitutional Affairs combined the group’s annual general meeting with a session on how the justice system is responding to violence against women and girls.

Led by co-chair Lord Hunt (Conservative), members elected Linsey Farnsworth (Labour) as the new co-chair, alongside two new officers, Sarah Russell (Labour) and Sarah Bool (Conservative).

Farnsworth introduced her background on the Justice Select Committee and her two decades as a Crown prosecutor supporting victims of crime, including work as an international liaison prosecutor on serious and organised crime.

Barbara Mills KC, chair of the Bar, then spoke on the challenges that female victims of domestic abuse face in the courts, drawing on her extensive family law practice.

She emphasised the impact of backlogs, logistical issues and retraumatising court environments, stressing the need for sustained investment and a coherent strategy to protect and support women.

Speaking from the solicitor perspective, Law Society vice president Brett Dixon underlined the importance of the government publishing its updated Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy.

He welcomed the MoJ’s recent ‘Everyday Business’ report showing that domestic abuse accounts for a significant proportion of family court cases, and reiterated the need for accessible legal support to help families secure safe arrangements.

During a Q&A, members raised concerns about shortages of qualified legal representatives, the impact of delays and ongoing difficulties contacting court staff.

Parliamentarians from across the political spectrum reflected on the need for collaboration between government and practitioners to improve resourcing and outcomes for victims.

MPs call for artificial intelligence (AI) regulation

During a Westminster Hall debate on AI safety on Wednesday 10 December, Iqbal Mohamed (Independent) argued that the UK currently operates in a “laissez-faire system where a sandwich has more regulation than AI companies.”

Mohamed emphasised that AI dangers are already being realised, pointing to Anthropic’s disclosure of an AI-driven cyber espionage operation, where a state-sponsored actor used AI tool Claude to conduct 80 to 90% of espionage activity.

During the debate, Dr Danny Chambers (Liberal Democrat) raised concerns about public reliance on AI chatbots for mental health support, noting that one in three UK adults have sought advice from them, sometimes receiving harmful guidance.

He urged ministers to introduce stronger regulatory controls to prevent further risks to vulnerable users.

Ayoub Khan (Independent) warned that artificial general intelligence could pose sweeping threats to society, including destabilising democratic processes.

He argued that unregulated algorithms already heighten harmful online content, creating a “perfect storm” when combined with rapid AI advances.

Anneliese Dodds (Labour/Co-op) pressed the government to commit to bringing forward an AI Bill and asked whether this would mandate ex-ante safety evaluations for frontier models.

Shadow minister Dr Ben Spencer criticised ministers for inconsistency, arguing that despite manifesto commitments to “binding regulation” for the most powerful systems, progress has repeatedly stalled.

Responding for the government, Kanishka Narayan, minister for AI and online safety, acknowledged strong parliamentary interest in AI legislation.

However, he reiterated that the government “does not speculate on legislation” and declined to provide a timetable for consultation or introduction of a bill, committing only to keep Parliament updated as plans develop. 

Join our panel discussion of the Hillsborough Law

We are delighted to be supporting the lord chancellor and deputy prime minister, Rt Hon David Lammy, in discussing the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, in collaboration with the Legal Aid Practitioners Group and the APPG on Access to Justice.

Joined by minister for victims Alex Davies-Jones, executive director of inquest Deborah Coles and families with lived experience, the event will look at the campaign history behind the bill (also known as the Hillsborough Law) and highlight the government's hopes for this legislation, which has been called the biggest expansion of legal aid in a decade.

The panel event will be co-chaired by Lord Bach and Sarah Russell MP.

Date: Tuesday 16 December, 5pm to 6pm.

Venue: Houses of Parliament, London.

Book your place at the Hillsborough Bill panel discussion

Coming up

We are working closely with MPs and peers to influence a number of bills before Parliament:

• Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill will begin its report stage in the Lords on a date to be confirmed
• Crime and Policing Bill began its committee stage in the Lords on 10 November
• Employment Rights Bill will begin a consideration of Lords message on 15 December
• Mental Health Bill is awaiting Royal Assent
• Planning and Infrastructure Bill is awaiting Royal Assent
• Public Office (Accountability) Bill will have its report stage in the Commons on a date to be confirmed
• Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will continue its committee stage in the Lords, which began on 14 November
• Sentencing Bill will begin its report stage in the Lords on 6 January