Recommendations & Conclusions
17 items
2
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
Long waits for cases to start, delays and the often–last–minute postponement of cases all have a significant impact on the victims of crime, particularly for victims of Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) and violent crimes, seriously disrupting their lives, inflicting additional distress on people who have already experienced terrible …
Read more
Long waits for cases to start, delays and the often–last–minute postponement of cases all have a significant impact on the victims of crime, particularly for victims of Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) and violent crimes, seriously disrupting their lives, inflicting additional distress on people who have already experienced terrible trauma, and leading many to withdraw from cases. In the year up to June 2024, 59% of victims of adult rape cases dropped out of the justice process pre–charge, which research by the Victims’ Commissioner attributes to victims’ unwillingness to prolong their trauma through long court cases that may not even lead to a conviction. The proportion of cases involving sexual offences and violence has increased greatly over the last 10 years. By September 2024, there were 11,574 open sexual offence cases in the Crown Court and 3,291 adult rape cases. There are measures that MoJ can and is taking to mitigate the impact of delays, including additional investment of £41 million in victim support services and working with the judiciary on prioritising RASSO cases, but more remains to be done to alleviate the impact of the backlog on the most vulnerable victims. recommendation a. MoJ, working with the judiciary, should try hard to reduce the number of hearings in cases of serious sexual and violent offences that are delayed or postponed on the day scheduled, as it is such circumstances that distress victims the most. b. MoJ should continue to protect the additional funding it has secured for victim support, and work with organisations providing support to look for ways to enhance this vital service.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and commits to rolling over the Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Fund and maintaining ringfenced spending for community-based sexual violence and domestic abuse support in 2025/26. It also engages regularly with providers to improve victim support, but defers further commitments to the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
3
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
For some time now, MoJ has been failing to adequately forecast increases in the number and mix of cases being sent to the Crown Court, reducing its ability to plan how the courts system may need to adapt to meet the varying caseload. MoJ carries out modelling to project likely …
Read more
For some time now, MoJ has been failing to adequately forecast increases in the number and mix of cases being sent to the Crown Court, reducing its ability to plan how the courts system may need to adapt to meet the varying caseload. MoJ carries out modelling to project likely numbers of new cases coming to the Crown Court, which it uses to inform its policy–making decisions. MoJ recognises that the increasing Crown Court backlog is due to the rising rate of new cases resulting from an increase in the number of police officers, and to the increasing proportion of more complex cases. Despite MoJ knowing in advance that government was planning on greatly increasing the number of police, and receiving funding specifically to meet the consequent rise in new criminal cases, it failed to adequately forecast the scale of the increase nor prepare the Crown Court for the increase in workload. It will not have helped that for two years between July 2021 and July 2023 the Criminal Justice Board, which brings together partners from across the criminal justice system to share information and plan collaboratively, did not meet. We were disappointed 5 to learn that MoJ expects that the rate of new cases will continue to outstrip the Crown Court’s ability to hear cases system over the next year, although it would not be drawn on how high it forecasts the backlog will be in a year’s time. recommendation a. MoJ should make better use of the data available to it to improve its approach to forecasting and understanding of future Crown Court cases. b. MoJ and HMCTS should use its improved forecasts to more quickly plan and implements changes to the courts system–its processes, people and infrastructure–to better meet the future caseload.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and commits to regularly reviewing its CJS projections to incorporate latest data, interventions, and evidence, and will keep its data use under continual review. Specific actions include developing the “OneCrown” single data pipeline and reviewing future demand scenarios with the Home Office …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
5
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
The proportion of hearings that do not take place on the day they are scheduled (ineffective trials) remains far too high, and there are causes of ineffective trials that MoJ and HMCTS could be more active in addressing now. One in four trials do not take place on the day …
Read more
The proportion of hearings that do not take place on the day they are scheduled (ineffective trials) remains far too high, and there are causes of ineffective trials that MoJ and HMCTS could be more active in addressing now. One in four trials do not take place on the day scheduled. There has been a marginal improvement since 2023 (the proportion of ineffective trials was then 27% compared to 25% more recently). While the improvement is welcome, the proportion of ineffective trials remains significantly higher than the pre–pandemic rate, which was consistently around 15%. The number of ineffective trials due to the unavailability of barristers or solicitors remains much higher than before the pandemic, and while the recent increase in the number of criminal barristers is welcome, we are not convinced that recent increases in legal aid fees have completely reversed the downward trend in legal professionals working in criminal law. We heard of other reasons for ineffective trials, some of which would seem to be straightforward to resolve, such as defendants on remand arriving late to court, poor case preparation, and a significant backlog of maintenance across the Crown Court estate. recommendation Alongside its Treasury Minute response, MoJ should write to the Committee to set out: • Its understanding of the causes of ineffective trials and the impact each has. • Whether professional capacity is a significant factor affecting ineffective trials. • What the impact has been on ineffective trial rates of changes it has made, for example, increases in legal aid fees. • What further actions are required and by whom to address the causes of ineffective trials. 7
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and will provide the requested letter outlining its understanding of ineffective trial causes, professional capacity factors, impact of changes, and further required actions, alongside its Treasury Minute response.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
6
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ could not tell us which of the actions it funded from nearly £500 million of additional funding it received through the 2021 Spending Review had the biggest impact on reducing the backlog, nor could it quantify what it expects the cost to be of dealing with the backlog now, …
Read more
MoJ could not tell us which of the actions it funded from nearly £500 million of additional funding it received through the 2021 Spending Review had the biggest impact on reducing the backlog, nor could it quantify what it expects the cost to be of dealing with the backlog now, raising concerns over MoJ’s ability to put a convincing and costed bid to the current Spending Review. MoJ received £477 million in the 2021 Spending Review to support recovery across the criminal justice system, including help to reduce the Crown Court backlog. MoJ received another £644 million a year by 2024–25 to expand capacity in the criminal justice system, including to manage increased numbers of new cases. The criminal justice system is complex, and the backlog in the Crown Court is affected by many factors including the rate at which new cases come in, judicial staffing levels, physical court capacity and the length of time cases take to conclude. However, with the current Spending Review and the Leveson Review, which is expected to make recommendations for fundamental reform to the judicial system, we would expect MoJ to be able to articulate more clearly how it previously used its resources to tackle the backlog. We also note that the longer it takes to hear cases, and the more they are delayed, the more expensive they become, both in terms of financial and social costs; there is therefore a clear incentive for all to fund the maximum available number of sitting days. recommendation Alongside its Treasury Minute response, MoJ should write to the Committee to clearly set out: • What it has spent in total since 2021 on reducing the backlog in the Crown Courts and how the additional funding was used. • The actions and interventions that money was spent on. • What it assesses has been the impact of that additional investment, including identifying the most cost–effective interventions.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and will provide the requested letter detailing total spending since 2021 on reducing the Crown Court backlog, how additional funding was used for interventions, and the assessed impact of that investment, alongside its Treasury Minute response.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
7
Recommendation
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
Despite MoJ assuring us that it has rectified the processing errors that led to it publishing inaccurate Crown Court statistics, we remain concerned that other datasets within the criminal justice system may be affected by the same quality and accuracy issues. MoJ paused publication of Crown Court caseload data between …
Read more
Despite MoJ assuring us that it has rectified the processing errors that led to it publishing inaccurate Crown Court statistics, we remain concerned that other datasets within the criminal justice system may be affected by the same quality and accuracy issues. MoJ paused publication of Crown Court caseload data between June and December 2024 because it had found errors in its published data. Investigation by MoJ and HMCTS concluded that processing errors, introduced following the roll out of Common Platform (the new digital case management system for the criminal justice system), meant that data in relation to some Crown Court cases was inaccurate. Following work to rectify the data processing issues and correct errors in its published data, MoJ and HMCTS assured us that 8 they now have a significant level of confidence in the accuracy of Crown Court data. Nevertheless, we remain concerned that similar errors exist in caseload data elsewhere in the criminal justice system. We are encouraged to learn that HMCTS is looking very hard at other ways that digitisation can improve the functioning of the courts, including the potential to use AI to improve the management of cases. recommendation In its Treasury Minute response, MoJ should: • Set out how it has assured itself that other datasets within the criminal justice system are accurate and are not affected by the same issues that reduced the accuracy of Crown Court data. • MoJ should set out what scope it sees for further digitisation or the use of AI to enhance the efficiency of the courts and the timely administration of justice. 9 1 The Ministry of Justice’s oversight Introduction
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and outlines its scope for further digitisation and AI, including current trials of transcription and summarisation in tribunals, past AI knowledge management trials, and plans to decommission legacy systems by Spring 2027. Future expansion of AI and data sharing improvements are contingent …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
8
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ has previously introduced measures to address the backlog, including those within the 2021 Criminal Justice Action Plan.17 MoJ described current work to manage the Crown Court caseload, including: • Increasing the number of sitting days to 108,500 this year. • Supporting the physical capacity of the courts estate by …
Read more
MoJ has previously introduced measures to address the backlog, including those within the 2021 Criminal Justice Action Plan.17 MoJ described current work to manage the Crown Court caseload, including: • Increasing the number of sitting days to 108,500 this year. • Supporting the physical capacity of the courts estate by maintaining Nightingale courts. • Running recruitment rounds for circuit judges and recorders. • Increasing magistrates’ sentencing powers from six months to 12 months.18
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government affirms its commitment to tackling the Crown Court backlog, outlining a range of measures including funding 110,000 Crown Court sitting days for 2025-26 (an increase from the previous year), increased court maintenance, ongoing judicial recruitment, and exploring legal aid funding. It also notes …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
12
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ acknowledges that long waits in the Crown Court are bad for everyone, including defendants, victims and the system as a whole.25 MoJ noted particular concern for victims of sex cases, which are very complex and often take a long time to conclude.26 In September 2024, there were 11,574 open …
Read more
MoJ acknowledges that long waits in the Crown Court are bad for everyone, including defendants, victims and the system as a whole.25 MoJ noted particular concern for victims of sex cases, which are very complex and often take a long time to conclude.26 In September 2024, there were 11,574 open sexual offence cases in the Crown Court, and 3,291 open adult rape cases.27 MoJ cited data that suggest victim attrition (where a victim withdraws from proceedings) has increased and is particularly high for adult rape cases, with 59% of victims dropping out pre–charge in June
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that ineffective trials for sexual offences are declining and that judicial practices already prioritise serious sexual offences. It also highlights continued protected funding for VAWG support services and commits to improving victim support, though future actions are contingent on the Spending Review.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ acknowledged that the long waits for RASSO victims is “not a particularly desirable situation” and outlined some measures in place to support these victims. These measures included: • investing £41 million in sexual violence and domestic violence advisors, and continuing to protect funding for victims (particularly for victims of …
Read more
MoJ acknowledged that the long waits for RASSO victims is “not a particularly desirable situation” and outlined some measures in place to support these victims. These measures included: • investing £41 million in sexual violence and domestic violence advisors, and continuing to protect funding for victims (particularly for victims of violence against women and girls); • supporting the independent judiciary’s work on listing and prioritisation of cases over two years old; and • focusing on transparency with criminal justice delivery dashboards with information at a local level on matters including victim attrition.34 The remand population
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's conclusion, reiterating that judicial listing practices already prioritise serious sexual offences, and confirming continued protected funding for Violence Against Women and Girls support services for 2025/26. It also notes it cannot pre-empt the outcome of Phase 2 of the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
16
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
Written evidence submitted by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons stated that the length of time that people are remanded for and the extent to which this is changing is information that is not in the public domain. The Inspectorate’s evidence also explained that “the increasing average length of time an …
Read more
Written evidence submitted by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons stated that the length of time that people are remanded for and the extent to which this is changing is information that is not in the public domain. The Inspectorate’s evidence also explained that “the increasing average length of time an individual is spending remanded in custody means that many require additional support. This group are at greater risk of losing their accommodation, employment and custody of their children (especially women)”.39 Further written evidence submitted by academics from the Open University and Bath Spa University explained how guilty pleas, which can expediate court processes and led to reduced sentences, are an attractive option for some people on remand regardless of their own belief in their guilt or innocence, and can therefore lead to miscarriages of justice.40
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to exploring initiatives to address time spent on remand and plans to develop and publish improved data on this by April 2027. It also highlights ongoing efforts to enhance court capacity and prioritise remand cases, and will consider further steps after independent …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
18
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ attributed the increasing backlog to a “significant increase” in the rate of new cases as a result of the recruitment of over 20,000 additional police officers since 2019, and to a change in the nature of the caseload to more complex cases.43 MoJ claimed that since the pandemic it …
Read more
MoJ attributed the increasing backlog to a “significant increase” in the rate of new cases as a result of the recruitment of over 20,000 additional police officers since 2019, and to a change in the nature of the caseload to more complex cases.43 MoJ claimed that since the pandemic it has become harder to make accurate forecasts about demand in the Crown Court, although it believes its forecasts are improving.44 HMCTS pointed in particular to the changing proportion of the overall caseload that is accounted for by violent crimes, which is up from 5,000 new cases per quarter in 2016, to 10,000 new cases per quarter in 2024.45 However, the recruitment of additional police officers was a planned–for policy, and MoJ received funding with the explicit purpose of managing the increased demand that would inevitably arise.46
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the Committee's observation and is committed to regularly reviewing its projections for the Criminal Justice System, incorporating latest data, trends, and new interventions. They are also developing a 'OneCrown' single data pipeline and reviewing future demand scenarios with partners to improve …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
19
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
The NAO report found that MoJ regularly models projections of the size of the Crown Court’s outstanding caseload, and has previously used projections from this modelling to inform decision–making on policy development, resource planning and capacity requirements.47 This modelling includes factors such as incoming demand, case complexity, court capacity and …
Read more
The NAO report found that MoJ regularly models projections of the size of the Crown Court’s outstanding caseload, and has previously used projections from this modelling to inform decision–making on policy development, resource planning and capacity requirements.47 This modelling includes factors such as incoming demand, case complexity, court capacity and court efficiency.48 The NAO also reported that the actual level of new cases in 2023–24 was lower than the number that MoJ had used to inform its ambition of reducing the backlog to 53,000 by March 2025, and that the increase in the projected backlog is primarily due to cases taking longer on average to conclude than had been expected.49 43 Qq 2, 82 ; C&AG’s Report, para 3.2 44 Q 83 45 Q 77 46 Q 15 47 C&AG’s Report, para 1.11 48 C&AG‘s Report, para 1.13 49 C&AG‘s Report, para 1.15 16
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to regularly reviewing its Crown Court caseload projections, incorporating the latest data, trends, and interventions, and continually reviewing its use of data and assumptions. This includes developing a 'OneCrown' single data pipeline to improve data quality and coherence, and reviewing future demand …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
20
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
At our evidence session in January 2025, MoJ could not tell us what it forecast the backlog would be in 12 months’ time. It told us that it would not be right to predict what the backlog will be in a year’s time, as it does not publish projections, although …
Read more
At our evidence session in January 2025, MoJ could not tell us what it forecast the backlog would be in 12 months’ time. It told us that it would not be right to predict what the backlog will be in a year’s time, as it does not publish projections, although it said it expected that the backlog would be higher then than it is now.50 MoJ explained that this is because the rate of completion of cases is not keeping pace with the increased rate of new cases. It told us that it is seeking to take action, including on court efficiency, to improve that position.51
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the Committee's observation and is committed to regularly reviewing its projections for the Criminal Justice System, incorporating latest data, trends, and new interventions. They are also developing a 'OneCrown' single data pipeline and reviewing future demand scenarios with partners to improve …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
25
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
We heard from HMCTS of other reasons for ineffective trials that would appear to have simple solutions.68 We heard how organisations contracted to transport prisoners fail to get all defendants from prison to court on time, incurring a financial penalty if the defendant arrives more than 15 minutes after the …
Read more
We heard from HMCTS of other reasons for ineffective trials that would appear to have simple solutions.68 We heard how organisations contracted to transport prisoners fail to get all defendants from prison to court on time, incurring a financial penalty if the defendant arrives more than 15 minutes after the scheduled start of court proceedings.69 Poor case preparation was also cited by MoJ as a major contributing factor to ineffective trials, and we heard from HMCTS how this was a long standing issue that had been considered by the original Leveson Review in 2015.70 We heard that MoJ and HMCTS are expecting the current Leveson Review to “endorse and enhance” the principles for better case management that the 2015 review set out.71 Ministry of Justice’s spending on the Crown Court backlog
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states it agrees with the Committee's conclusions and claims the underlying recommendation regarding issues causing ineffective trials, such as prisoner transport and case preparation, has been implemented as of April 2025, with further details provided in a separate letter.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
29
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
In evidence to the Justice Committee in November 2024, the Lady Chief Justice described how the concordat agreement with MoJ for 2024–25, agreed under the previous administration, had provided for 106,000 sitting days. She reported that in August HMCTS had then said the courts could actually sit up to a …
Read more
In evidence to the Justice Committee in November 2024, the Lady Chief Justice described how the concordat agreement with MoJ for 2024–25, agreed under the previous administration, had provided for 106,000 sitting days. She reported that in August HMCTS had then said the courts could actually sit up to a maximum capacity of 113,000 days; in light of which there had been conversations about whether the MoJ wanted to fund to maximum capacity, and the decision was taken not to do so. An additional 500 days had been found, taking the total sitting days to 106,500, but from within HMCTS’s allocation, not with additional funding. She said that the decision to limit to 106,500 had had a drastic effect, with cases that were ready to be heard not likely to come back before late 2025–26 or even 2027. She stressed that this would not be saving money, and that by deferring cases the costs would actually increase, with the CPS and barristers having to redo and refresh work done previously, in addition to the social cost of delays. The Lady Chief Justice commented that “There was an opportunity to sit to maximum capacity at 113,000 and it was not taken.” 81 Returning to our evidence session in January. MoJ told us that one of the key things it was doing to address the backlog was doing as much as it could, within funding 75 Q 9 76 Q 19 77 Q 22 78 Q 73 79 Q 38 80 Q 30 81 Justice Committee, Oral evidence: Work of the Lady Chief Justice, 26 November 2024, HC 421, Qq 3, 6, 21 20 constraints, on sitting days.82 It told us that a small fluctuation in its budget emerged at the end of last year, as a result of which it was able to fund an additional 2,000 sitting days, taking the total to 108,500 for the year.83 Accuracy of data across the criminal justice system
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to funding 110,000 Crown Court sitting days in 2025-26, the highest allocation ever, and outlines various other ongoing initiatives such as judicial recruitment, increased legal aid funding, and court maintenance to reduce the backlog. It also states it awaits recommendations from the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
30
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
MoJ confirmed that it had identified three factors that caused it to pause publication of its Crown Court caseload data from June to December 2024. It had found that case records in Common Platform (the new digital case management system for the criminal justice system) had been adversely affected through …
Read more
MoJ confirmed that it had identified three factors that caused it to pause publication of its Crown Court caseload data from June to December 2024. It had found that case records in Common Platform (the new digital case management system for the criminal justice system) had been adversely affected through human error, technical systems issues and data coding issues. It undertook two actions to rectify these issues: it checked how data was being input into Common Platform, and it commissioned an external review of the quality of Crown Court caseload data.84 MoJ and HMCTS assured us that following these actions, they now have a significant level of confidence in Crown Court data.85 HMCTS told us that it now undertakes more thorough user testing before releasing new features in Common Platform.86
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government confirms the external review found confidence in Crown Court caseload statistics and details improvements made to magistrates’ caseload data measurement, including revisions due to identified issues in legacy systems. It also notes ongoing investigation for further remedial action for a small number of …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
31
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
Despite these assurances, we concur with a request from the Law Society of England and Wales in its written submission to us for confirmation from MoJ that other data and statistics across the criminal and civil courts are not similarly affected.87 Exemplifying this point, in correspondence to us after the …
Read more
Despite these assurances, we concur with a request from the Law Society of England and Wales in its written submission to us for confirmation from MoJ that other data and statistics across the criminal and civil courts are not similarly affected.87 Exemplifying this point, in correspondence to us after the evidence session, HMCTS set out how MoJ’s data relating to the remand population are not accurate enough for MoJ to draw insights from.88
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government confirms confidence in Crown Court caseload statistics and details improvements made to magistrates’ caseload data, noting previous overstatements due to legacy system issues and committing to further revisions for additional legacy cases in the future. It also states that other caseload elements like …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
32
Conclusion
12th Report - Crown Court backlogs
Accepted
We were relieved to hear from HMCTS that the operation of Common Platform has “vastly improved” over the last few years, describing it as a “a good and stable system”, and that HMCTS now has confidence in the system’s reliability.89 HMCTS told us that it introduced Common Platform gradually into …
Read more
We were relieved to hear from HMCTS that the operation of Common Platform has “vastly improved” over the last few years, describing it as a “a good and stable system”, and that HMCTS now has confidence in the system’s reliability.89 HMCTS told us that it introduced Common Platform gradually into the Crown Court to minimise the inherent risks associated with introducing a brand–new IT system. We were told by HMCTS that it is building on the foundation it has established introducing digitisation to the courts, for example looking to realise the potential of AI to improve the management of cases within the criminal justice system.90 82 Q 2 83 Q 61 84 Q 84 85 Q 84 86 Letter from HMCTS to PAC, 22 January 2025 87 CCB0001, p1, para 5 88 Letter from HMCTS to PAC, 22 January 2025 89 Q 84; Letter from HMCTS to PAC, 22 January 2025 90 Qq 84, 85 21
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government confirms continued trials of AI in courts and tribunals, though scaling up is dependent on future Spending Review funding. It also outlines plans for further digitisation, including decommissioning legacy systems (Xhibit and Libra) by Spring 2027 to reduce dual-keying, and exploring improved integration …
Read full response →
HM Treasury