The treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) individuals in the criminal justice system: the Lammy Review
At the beginning of 2016, David Lammy MP was asked by the then Prime Minister David Cameron to review the workings of the criminal justice system, with the object of seeing whether the system worked fairly, in particular in relation to BAME individuals. (The review was noted in this blog in February 2016; its interim findings were noted here in November 2016)
The final report of the review was published in September 2017.
The bare statistics tell a familiar story. Thus the study found, for example:
- the fact that BAME individuals are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system costs the taxpayer at least £309 million each year;
- the proportion of BAME young offenders in custody rose from 25% to 41% between 2006 and 2016, despite the overall number of young offenders falling to record lows;
- the rate of Black defendants pleading not guilty in Crown Courts in England and Wales between 2006 and 2014 was 41%, compared to 31% of white defendants. (This means they lose the possibility of reduced sentences and it raises questions about their level of trust in the system.);
- the BAME proportion of young people offending for the first time rose from 11% in 2006 to 19% a decade later;
- there was an identical increase in the BAME proportion of young people reoffending over the same period.
Lammy looked at what happens in a number of other countries to see whether we could learn from experience elsewhere.
Two specific examples may be noted.
- Taking inspiration from youth justice in Germany, Lammy argues that rigorous assessments of a young offender’s maturity should inform sentencing decisions. Those judged to have low levels of maturity could also receive extended support from the youth justice system until they are 21.
- He also called for ‘Local Justice Panels’ to be established, taking inspiration from New Zealand’s Rangatahi courts, where local people with a direct stake in a young offender’s life are invited to contribute to their hearings. These panels would normally deal with first-time offenders given community sentences, include key figures such as teachers or social workers, and hold local services to account for a child’s rehabilitation.
Lammy made a number of innovative recommendations for judges, prosecutors and prisons.
For example, he proposed that a ‘deferred prosecution’ model be rolled out, allowing low-level offenders to receive targeted rehabilitation before entering a plea. Those successfully completing rehabilitation programmes would see their charges dropped, while those who did not would still face criminal proceedings. (Such a scheme has already been piloted in the West Midlands, with violent offenders 35% less likely to reoffend. Victims were also more satisfied, feeling that intervention before submitting a plea was more likely to stop reoffending.)
He recommended that all sentencing remarks made by judges in the Crown Court should be published. He argued that this could help to make justice more transparent for victims, witnesses and offenders. It would also start to address the ‘trust deficit’ between BAME individuals and the justice system, which Lammy argues has contributed to Black and Asian men and Asian women being over 50% more likely than their White counterparts to enter a not guilty plea.
He also argues the UK should learn from the US system for ‘sealing’ criminal records, claiming ex-offenders should be able to apply to have their case heard by a judge or independent body, such as the Parole Board, where they could prove they have reformed. The judge would then decide whether to ‘seal’ the record, having considered factors such as time since the offence and evidence of rehabilitation. If the decision goes the applicant’s way, their record will still exist, but the individual would not need to disclose it and employers would not be able to access it. Lammy hoped this would help the people affected to become more employable.
Lammy accepts that there are other wider social issues that must be addressed as well; but he argues that the recommendations he makes could do much to build greater trust in the criminal justice system, reduce reoffending and improve outcomes for victims.
Whether or not these recommendations will lead to actual changes on the ground is too early to say. The fact that two Prime Ministers strongly supported the review might suggest that there would be some political impetus for follow-up. But, given other political priorities, I would not expect a rapid response from Ministers.
The Press Release, with links to the report can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/lammy-publishes-historic-review
Leave a Reply