According to the Courts and Tribunals website - Magistrates - some 12,000 people in England and Wales have volunteered their time to be a magistrate or Justice of the Peace (JP). They can be appointed from the age of 18 and retire at 75. The overall number has been much reduced in recent years and is now about 50% lower than about 15 years ago. They deliver summary justice in the Magistrates' Courts of England and Wales.
In 2010 there were 320 Magistrates' Court locations in England and Wales but the number has been reduced markedly and is now in the region of 160. The closures have been deliberate government policy and Magistrates' Court locations are now to be found mainly in the cities or larger towns.
JPs do not have to hold any legal qualifications and, to conduct their duties, they are advised on law and procedure by legally-qualified "legal advisers," Their work is done voluntarily though some expenses can be claimed. The Magistrates Association supports and represents them but membership of the association is voluntary.
History
The origins of the office of JP extend back to medieval times when the
Monarch had need of trusty people capable of dealing with offenders. At
that time, such persons were naturally those with local power and wealth (i.e. usually
large landowners). It is the Justices of the Peace Act 1361
from which the present day powers of the JP can be traced.
Over the
centuries, the JP has been a very useful resource when Parliament has
required some task or other to be performed. For instance, the
administration of the licensing laws was a major function of the
justices for centuries until the Licensing Act 2003
transferred it to local authorities. The magistracy has proved to be extremely
adaptable and modern benches are now made up of people
from many different walks of life and income levels.
In the late 1940s a Royal Commission on Justices of the Peace - (under the Chairmanship of Lord Du Parcq)
- sat and recommended the continuation of the system of lay justices. A
minority of Commission members - (notably Lord Merthyr) - dissented and
considered that there should be a gradual replacement of lay justices
by "stipendiary magistrates" who were legally-qualified (i.e. at the
time barristers or solicitors of at least 7 years standing). The report
of the Royal Commission was considered in a Modern Law Review article by James Whiteside and it makes interesting reading. The Lord Chancellor of the time - (Lord Jowitt of Stevenage)
- stated that he would need 500 Stipendiary Magistrates if the JPs were
to be replaced and he would be unable to find them. In any event, he
was of the view that it was "an excellent thing that justice should be
administered by the ordinary lay people ..." James Whiteside wrote:
The long and interesting history of the Magistracy was masterfully recorded by Sir Thomas Skyrme in his three volume "History of the Justices of the Peace" (1990).
See also Law and Lawyers - "A Jewel Beyond Price ... the Magistracy of England and Wales" (December 2010) and also March 2011. (NB: Those posts are not updated).
At this point, it is worth noting that both Scotland and Northern Ireland have similar appointments but their history and roles are rather different.
Other parts of the United Kingdom:
For Northern Ireland, the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 made significant changes and introduced, from 1st April 2005, the new office of "Lay Magistrate" - see Judiciary NI - Lay Magistrates
In Scotland, a new system of "Justice of the Peace Courts" was set up under Part 4 of the Criminal Proceedings etc (Reform)(Scotland) Act 2007. This development came about in an interesting way. The Scottish Ministers commissioned a "Summary Justice Review" and a majority of the review team recommended abolition of the office of JP. However, there was a "Note of Dissent"
by Sheriff Brian Lockhart and Mrs Helen G Murray JP. The Scottish
Parliament was persuaded by the dissenters and not only legislated to
retain "lay justice" in Scotland but also created the Justice of the
Peace Courts. The former District Courts.were abolished. It is worth
noting here that the Note of Dissent remarked that lay justice is "a powerful expression of community participation in the regulation of society."
The modern magistracy of England and Wales:
Appointments: JPs are appointed
by the Lord Chief Justice "on behalf of and in the name of Her Majesty"
(Courts Act 2003 s10). In practice, "Advisory Committees" are responsible for recruitment and
selection.
Judiciary UK - Advisory Committees on Justices of the Peace
The committees seek people of "Good character" who demonstrate 5 key attributes:
- Making fair, impartial and transparent decisions – magistrates must be decisive and able to form reasoned opinions that are unbiased, impartial and transparent by following a structured approach when deliberating. Magistrates also need to be able to assimilate large amounts of information and identify relevant issues
- Understanding and appreciating different perspectives – magistrates must be able to recognise and appreciate different perspectives, deal with others compassionately and show genuine understanding and empathy towards their situation. They also need awareness of and a willingness to understand key aspects of societal issues
- Communicating with sensitivity and respect – magistrates must be able to listen actively and attentively, clarify opinions and communicate confidently and sensitively within confidential boundaries. They also need to be able to adapt their communication style to match the situation and clearly articulate the rationale for the decisions they make.
- Showing self-awareness and being open to learning – magistrates must be open-minded, able to reflect and learn from other people’s perspectives, and adapt quickly to changes. They also need to be able to seize opportunities to learn and maintain their competence, as well as use effective strategies to maintain their personal wellbeing.
- Working and engaging with people professionally – magistrates must be approachable and dependable, able to instil trust and confidence, and work in a professional and efficient manner both independently and with others. They need to be able to encourage others to participate and engage them in decision-making, appropriately challenging any prejudice in themselves and others.
Commission of the Peace and Local Justice: Once recruited, the new justice is appointed by the Lord Chief Justice to the "Commission of the Peace for England and Wales." (Since the Courts Act 2003 s.7, there is just this single commission as opposed to the earlier arrangement of separate commissions held by counties or larger cities.
The justice is then allocated to a "Local Justice Area"(LJA) which will, typically, have a single Magistrates' Court building though arrangements vary from place-to-place.
The actual court premises are managed by Her Majesty's Courts and
Tribunal Service (HMCTS) - an agency of the Ministry of Justice - which
has taken over this role from the previous Magistrates' Courts
Committees. Those committees were swept into history by the Courts Act 2003 s.6. and this considerably reduced the control which the magistrates had over the individual courts.
Swearing in and training: The new "Justice of the Peace" will be sworn in and takes the same judicial oath as the judges:
“I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly
serve our Sovereign King Charles the Third in the office of ________ ,
and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of
this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will.” [Alternative oaths exist for other religions or the person may affirm].
The justice is referred to in the Courts Act 2003 as a "lay justice" (Courts Act 2003 s.9)
and is required to undertake a minimum number of sittings each year.
Whilst serving, justices are paid allowances for travel and, sometimes,
subsistence. Justices may resign at any time and may, in certain
circumstances, be removed from office. Many retired justices have
their name added to the Supplemental List which is a recognition of
their service.
Justices are required to undertake training for their role - Courts Act 2003 s.19.
though the full detail of the training requirements is set out in
Statutory Rules. There is also a legal requirement for periodic appraisal of justices in their various roles.
The Justices of the Peace Rules 2016 introduced committees called Justices’ Training, Approvals, Authorisations and Appraisals Committees (JTAAAC) and Family Training, Approvals, Authorisations and Appraisals Committees (FTAAAC). These replaced earlier committees.
Training and appraisal schemes are designed to ensure justices demonstrate the necessary competence in their roles. Justices must complete training courses approved by the Lord Chief Justice and be appraised as competent in their roles
The Magistrates' Court make up:
Cases in the Magistrates' Court are heard either by a bench of three JPs
(who are advised by a legal adviser) or by a District Judge
(Magistrates' Courts) - and, sometimes, they also have a legal adviser.
In general, both forms of court have the same legal powers.
The law relating to District Judges (Magistrates' Courts) is in the Courts Act 2003 ss. 22 to 26. Originally these appointees were known as
Stipendiary Magistrates. A DJ(MC) is a justice of the peace (Courts
Act 2003 s25) and may usually sit alone (s26).
The work of the Magistrates Courts: Cases
in Magistrates' Courts generally fall to be heard either in the adult
court (defendants aged 18 and over) or youth court (ages 10 to under 18). Some JPs are also part of the Family Court judiciary.
In the adult court, magistrates try the less serious criminal cases and, in practice, over 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with in the Magistrates' Court.
There are certain cases (e.g. murder) which can only be tried in the Crown Court. There are also offences (e.g. common assault) which may only tried by magistrates.
Many offences
are said to be "either-way" offences so that, depending on seriousness,
the case may be tried either by the magistrates or by the Crown Court. In such cases, an allocation decision is made to determine whether the case should be tried in the Crown Court or Magistrates' Court - see Sentencing Council - Allocation. In "either-way" cases the defendant usually has a right to "elect" for
trial in the Crown Court.
In adult criminal cases the Magistrates' Court currently has a maximum
sentencing power for one offence of 12 months imprisonment. Fines may be imposed but must not exceed the statutory limits - see Sentencing Council - Fines.
The Youth Court - (until the Criminal Justice Act 1991 known as "juvenile courts") - is the venue of trial for the vast majority of cases against children and young persons. Usually the youth court is either a District Judge (Magistrates' Courts) or a bench of three JPs. For certain offences, it is possible for trial to be conducted in the Youth Court by a Circuit or High Court Judge.
Youth Court proceedings are held in private. The court has an extensive range of "disposals" available for dealing with cases. Welfare considerations play a large part in deciding what is to happen to offenders.
Legal advisers:
Legal advice to Magistrates is the subject of the Courts Act 2003 section 28 - 29. When providing advice, the advisers are not subject to the direction of any person other than the Lord Chief Justice or a judicial office holder nominated by the Lord Chief Justice (section 29).
The arrangements for legal advice were amended considerably by the Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Act 2018
Appeals from Magistrates' Courts: These take one of two forms. The more usual is an appeal to the Crown Court. This may be against either conviction or against sentence or both. The hearing of an appeal against conviction is a retrial of the case and is heard by a Judge sitting with magistrates. The other form of appeal is known as "Appeal by way of case stated" and is to the High Court on points of law.
The future?
Whilst the administration of justice is of huge importance, money supply is far from unlimited and government often has other priorities. In such a climate, it is inevitable that ways will be sought to minimize expenditure and, for this reason, the criminal justice system will be adapted to provide trial processes considered to be adequate for the various levels of case.
The outcome of a Review of the Criminal Courts is now awaited and I am not going to try to guess what its recommendations may be but the idea of some form of intermediate court (Judge + 2 JPs) is gaining traction. The aim of that is, of course, to reduce markedly the workload of the Crown Court but some arrangement will be needed for appeals..
Further reading: Lord Justice Auld - Criminal Courts Review (2001) - Chapter 4 - Magistrates.
The 2011 post on Magistrates is HERE.
No comments:
Post a Comment