Courts and Tribunals Bill — Written evidence submitted by Wales and Chester Circuit (CTB39)

1
Courts and Tribunals Bill
Public Bill Committee
Written Evidence
Submission from the Wales and Chester Circuit

About us
The Wales & Chester Circuit (“W&CC”) is one of the six circuits that together
constitute the Bar in England and Wales. Its members practice across both Wales and
England.

Introduction
The W&CC stands wholly with our colleagues based in England in opposition to the
attack upon the right to jury trial within the jurisdiction of England and Wales
contained with the Courts and Tribunals Bill.

Removing juries as the finders of fact from a huge swathe of criminal cases and
replacing them with judges will do nothing to address the backlog of such cases, but
will do real damage to trust in the criminal justice system when the general public –
which includes victims, defendants, witnesses and the wider community alike - is
already cautious of elitism.

The general opposition set out by the General Council of the Bar to the Public Bill
Committee of the House of Commons on 25 March 2026 on our collective behalf is
both principled, informed and moreover right.

However, the W&CC is also unique within the Bar of England and Wales.

The situation on the Wales and Chester Circuit
Whereas it is one of only two circuits (together with the South Eastern Circuit) which
is home to a primary legislature making primary legislation for the jurisdiction (the
UK Parliament in the case of the SEC and the Senedd in the case of the W&CC), the
W&CC is alone amongst the circuits in representing an entire geographical area to
which primary legislation is applicable (Wales).

The W&CC is alone amongst the circuits in that it has two governments, the UK
Government and the Welsh Government, whose activities both impact upon, and are
impacted by, the administration of justice.

2
Accordingly, the W&CC is in a position to make some unique – additional - points in
opposition to the Bill which should be taken into account.
The UK Government proposes making fundamental changes to the administration of
criminal justice in Wales with the explicit motivation being to address a backlog in
the Crown Court in England. There is no equivalent backlog in the Crown Court in
Wales.

There is no electoral mandate in Wales to support such constitutional change as the
restriction of the right to jury trial. Of course, Wales is not alone in that regard, there
being no such electoral mandate in England either, as the Labour Party did not
include any such proposal in its 2024 UK General Election manifesto
1.

On the other hand, there is an electoral mandate in Wales for the devolution of
criminal justice. It was included in the manifesto of the Labour Party in its successful
election to form the present Welsh Government
2, and as a policy it has cross-party
support in the Senedd (where it has been the subject of a motion of the Fifth Senedd
passed by 32 votes to 8)3.

That electoral mandate is supported by the findings and recommendations of
successive commissions:

• the Commission on Devolution in Wales 2014, chaired by Sir Paul Silk, a
former Clerk to both the House of Commons and the Senedd, with Lord
Bourne, Jane Davidson, Dr Eurfyl ap Gwilym, Rob Humphreys, Trefor
Jones CVO CBE, Professor Noel Lloyd CBE and Helen Molyneaux;
4 and

• the Commission on Justice in Wales 2019, chaired by the former Lord
Chief Justice of England & Wales, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, with Simon
Davies, Professor Elwen Evans KC, Dr Nerys Llewelyn Jones, Juliet Lyon
CBE, Sarah Payne CBE, Professor Rick Rawlings, Professor Peter Vaughan
QPM and Sir Wyn Williams
5.

1 Change: Labour Party Manifesto 2024 – the only proposal to address the “courts backlog” was the
sensible and moderate promise “to ensure more prosecutors are available by allowing Associate
Prosecutors to work on appropriate cases” (see page 71)
2 Moving Wales Forward: Welsh Labour Manifesto 2021, “Chapter 10: Our Nation”, page 66 and “Welsh
Labour’s Promise to Wales” # 4
3 Member Debate under Standing Order 11.21(iv): Criminal Justice, NDM6665, 7 March 2018; and Voting
Outcomes Plenary – Fifth Senedd 07/03/2018
4 Commission on Devolution in Wales Part II – Empowerment and Responsibility: Legislative Powers to
Strengthen Wales, March 2014, Chapter 10 – Policing and Justice
5 Justice in Wales for the People of Wales, The Commission on Justice in Wales Report, October 2019,
“Chapter 4: Criminal Justice: Reducing Crime and Promoting Rehabilitation” and “Chapter 12:
Governance, the law of Wales and the judiciary”

3
Both commissions focused exclusively upon the justice system as administered in
Wales, identified its flaws and set out the remedies - in the case of the Thomas
Commission with laser-like focus.

By contrast, the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts Part 1
6, authored by Sir
Brian Leveson alone (albeit with the support of civil servants from the Ministry of
Justice), mentions “Wales” 119 times but only one once, at Chapter 8 paragraph 71,
otherwise than as part of the phrase “England and Wales”, and only then "by way of
example” as to the merits of the wholly trite recommendation that Crown Court
hearings should take place in any available courtroom
7.

The following question needs to be askedWhy does the UK Government believe it
appropriate to introduce fundamental constitutional reforms to the criminal justice
system in Wales, without any electoral mandate to do so and to address a problem
which does not exist in Wales, on the sole basis of a review undertaken by Sir Brian
Leveson, which gives no consideration whatsoever to Wales, in the face of the
genuine electoral mandate, the manifesto commitments of the Labour Party, the will
of the Senedd as expressed in a cross-party vote, and the recommendations of the
Silk Commission and the Thomas Commission to devolve criminal justice in Wales?

It is unconscionable that the UK Government seeks in these circumstances, not
merely to ignore the calls for greater democratic participation for the people of Wales
in their criminal justice system, but actually to remove them from it.

That inequity is all the more stark given that the Public Bill Committee presently
scrutinising the detail of the Courts and Tribunals Bill has not a single Welsh MP (18
English MPs and 2 Scottish MPs) to assist it in the scrutiny of a bill which proposes
fundamental constitutional reforms to the criminal justice system in Wales.

Whereas there are undoubtedly a number of deep-rooted problems in the Welsh
criminal justice system which call out for fundamental reform in the Welsh criminal
justice system (just read the Silk Commission and the Thomas Commission), a
backlog in the Crown Court is not one of them.

6 Independent Review of the Criminal Courts Part 1, 18 June 2025
7 Sir Brian Leveson observing that using any ‘available courtroom’ might, for example, bring Crown
Court justice back to those areas of Wales outside the Crown Court centres which are (now)
essentially based in North and South Wales. Sir Brian is silent as to how many of the various courts in
Mid and West Wales which have been closed by the Ministry of Justice in recent years remain
available to use and have not been sold off for other uses, such as a café (Carmarthen) or offices
(Dolgellau).

4
And neither is the participation by the people of Wales in their criminal justice
system as jurors.

The parts of the Bill restricting their participation should be deleted.

Signed
Christopher Rees KC, Leader of the Wales and Chester Circuit

Bar Council
24 April 2026