Archive for the ‘chapter 7’ Category
Transforming the Justice system – views from the National Audit Office
In this blog, I have tried to keep readers abreast of developments with the major Transformation of the Justice system programme. I have observed that this is not always easy and depends on keeping an eye out for press releases, blogs and now the new monthly e-bulletin issued by HM Courts and Tribunals Service.
In May 2018, the National Audit Office (NAO) published its first appraisal of how the programme is going.
Obviously the NAO is supportive of the aims of the programme, which it summarises as follows:
In 2016, HMCTS set up a portfolio of change programmes that will introduce
new technology and working practices to modernise and upgrade the justice system.
By March 2023, HMCTS expects to employ 5,000 fewer staff, reduce the number ofcases held in physical courtrooms by 2.4 million cases per year and reduce annualspending by £265 million. Savings will come from lower administrative and judicial staff costs, fewer physical hearings and running a smaller estate. As well as making savings HMCTS expects the reformed system to work better for all those involved, use court time more proportionately, and make processes more accessible to users.
The NAO report helpfully reminds readers of the scale and scope of the overall programme:
The HMCTS change portfolio consists of several related programmes, which in turnare made up of many individual projects. The major programmes are:• The HMCTS Reform Programme which is modernising processes and systemsto reduce demand on courts by moving activity out of courtrooms. For example,it will introduce online services and digital case files and expand the use of videotechnology in hearings.• The Common Platform Programme which is developing shared processesand a digital criminal justice case management system to share informationbetween HMCTS, the Crown Prosecution Service and the police. It is jointlymanaged by these organisations.• The Transforming Compliance and Enforcement Programme (TCEP) whichis upgrading systems in HMCTS’s National Compliance and Enforcement Service,used to enforce court orders such as penalties and compensation.
As part of these programmes, HMCTS is also reducing and modernising thecourt and tribunal estate and creating cross-jurisdictional hearing centres and national ‘customer service centres’. These will centralise case management and administration and provide support to the public, judges and lawyers on civil and criminal matters.
1 The scope of the programme is challenging
2 The timetable has been expanded
3 The scope of some projects has been reduced
4 Progress has been slower than expected
5 Costs have risen and likely benefits decreased
6 There remain funding gaps for the later stages.
The NAO notes that many of these points have been taken on board within HMCTS. Nonetheless, the NAO argues that more should be done to demonstrate in detail how the reformed system will work. It states that it is important to sustain the committment of all those involved in the design and delivery of the new service. It implicitly criticises the Ministry of Justice for its failure to reintroduce the legislation that will be needed to ensure that aspects of the reform programme can be implemented. The NAO warns that the scale and spped of change may result in changes having unexpected consequences. And as much of the anticipated savings arise from reductions in staff, this could actually lead to an inability to deliver the service.
The public response of HMCTS has been upbeat – as indeed it has to be. A Press Release acknowledges that the programme is challenging; it summarises a number of specific changes that have been delivered; and remains confident that the programme will be successfully delivered.
My own view is that it is very important that the transformation programme is delivered. But the managerial challenge of delivering a large scale change should not be underestimated. To date, key judicial figures have been working with HMCTS to promote the need for and advantages of change. Continued judicial leadership will be essential. But I think it would be wise to develop a wider group of ‘change champions’, particularly within the judiciary more broadly and from the legal professions. Many practitioners will accept that the current system does not serve the public well. Many will have good ideas for how things could be done more efficiently and to greater public benefit. Giving them the encouragement to voice their support for change would be highly desirable.
The NAO report is at https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Early-progess-in-transforming-courts-and-tribunals.pdf.
The HMTCS Press release is at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmcts-response-to-national-audit-office-report-on-court-reform-programme?utm_medium=email&utm_source=
Keeping up to date with the Transformation of our Justice System project
I have commented before that it is quite hard for those outside Government and the Judiciary to keep abreast of developments with the Transformation project. Occasional blog items from HM Courts and Tribunals service are useful but don’t necessarily pick up all that is going on.
I therefore welcome the announcement that from June there is to be a monthly e-bulletin devoted to the programme. Those interested are able to subscribe to the service, thereby receiving regular updates.
The first edition is available at https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/UKHMCTS/bulletins/1f03e7b
The Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Bill 2018
The great Transformation of the Justice System programme, being advanced by the Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunals Service was initially supported, legislatively, by a substantial Prisons and Courts Bill 2017. This fell when the General Election was called in June 2017. (See this Blog, March 2017 and July 2017). Since then, legal system watchers have been awaiting the return of the Bill, either in its original form or in a new guise.
Our patience is now at least partially rewarded with the publication of the Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Bill 2018, which was introduced into the House of Lords at the end of May 2018. As its title suggests, this is not the full legislative package originally envisaged. Rather it is a short, 4 clause Bill Iwith Schedue) which proposes measures to facilitate the more flexible deployment of judicial and other staff.
Once enacted, the judiciary will be flexibly deployed across jurisdictions, allowing judges to gain experience of different types of cases, helping with their career progression. It will also enable judges to be used in specific courts or tribunals where there are serious backlogs of cases.
As regards the taking over of tasks currently undertaken by judges, authorised staff could carry out some of the more straightforward judicial functions, including tasks like issuing a summons; taking a plea; extending time for service of applications; or considering applications for variations of directions made in private or public law children cases. One noteworthy measure is that the role of the Justices’ Clerk, currently a statutory one, will become non-statutory. This will enable them to give advice on law in the Family Court as well as in the Magistrates’ Court.
Details of the Bill are at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0108/lbill_2017-20190108_en_2.htm#sch1
Transforming the Justice system – maintaining the estate; answering the phones; better listing
I have noted many of the developments that are currently taking place within courts and tribunals, arising from the Transformation programme that has been on-going for the past couple of years. Much of the emphasis has been on the design and development of new practices and procedures – e.g. pilot schemes relating to the use of on-line courts, or the digitization of procedures
A recent blog from the Head of HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Susan Acland-Hood, notes that the transformation programme is not just the use of high-tech innovations. It also includes more bread and butter issues, which nonetheless affect the public and those who work in the courts.
In her recent post, she notes three specific examples of investment, designed to improve the day-to-day operation of the courts and the court service.
1 Maintenance and repair. Many court buildings suffer from heating systems that do not work, lifts that do not work, and a generally drab physical environment. The modernisation programme includes improvements to the overall environment of courts and tribunals.
2 Answering the phone. Investment is being made in a number of call centres whose task will be to answer questions directed to a number of courts – county courts and magistrates courts. This is designed to ensure that calls don’t go unanswered, especially in smaller courts where there may be insufficient staff to handle all the incoming calls.
3 Tacking delay. The blog notes that the number of outstanding cases in the Crown Court is at the lowest level since 2004; the time taken from first listing in the Magistrates’ Court to completion at the Crown Court has been decreasing since the peak of 196 days in 2015 to 175 days in 2017. (It is not clear whether this is due to greater efficiency or because few cases are coming into the criminal justice system.) It also note the positive impact of the use of single-justices hearings to reduce delay.
Forther information is available at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/2018/05/17/reform-means-getting-the-basics-right-too/
Equal treatment: Guidance from the Judicial College
It should go without saying that, particularly in the legal arena, those who take part in proceedings before courts and tribunals need to feel that they have been treated equally.
This is, of course, easier said than done, as David Lammy’s report on the Criminal Justice System, published in 2017 showed. (See this blog 29 Sept 2017). But for many years first the Judicial Studies Board and now the Judicial College have offered guidance to judges (and by extension to others involved in the justice system) about the best ways to try to ensure that people are treated fairly.
Much of this focusses on the language that judges and others involved in the justice system use generally (for example in relation to litigants in person) and in relation to those from specific sectors of society, who may be defined by their religion, their ethnicity, their sexual orientation, mental or physical disabilities, their gender.
In February 2018, the Judicial College published an on-line updated revision to its ‘Equal Treatment Bench Book’. Bench books were originally devised as a handy guide to key issues which could sit on the judge’s desk, available for him to refer to it that seemed necessary.
I am not sure whether this particular Bench Book can be used in this way. For one thing, it is very long – well over 400 pages. And the issues raised are such that I would have thought judges would need to have considered them before a case or other proceedings have started. (It would not be desirable for a judge to stop in the middle of a sentence in order to look up how a particular person should be addressed.)
But I don’t agree, as some comments in the press have suggested, that the Equal Treatment Bench Book is an example of political correctness gone mad. It seems to me to be an honourable attempt to raise questions and address issues that arise in practice but that many judges may not have thought about before. (Indeed, I think there are some parts of the book that would be of interest to a wider readership.)
I set out the link to the text here, and invite readers to take a look at the Book and come to their own view on its value.
Family justice: reforming public law case procedures
Hot on the heels of the announcement of on-line divorce applications (see this blog Feb 2 2018), information has just been published as a blog from HMCTS on developments relating to the digitalisation of procedures relating to public law childrens’ cases.
Emma Petty, Service Manager for the Public Law project, writes:
We want to make the public law process more efficient, ensuring the court, parties and their representatives have access to the right information at the right time to help decide the best outcomes for children involved in public law cases. Based on our early thinking, the aims of the project could be to:
- provide an online application process which speeds up the gatekeeping process and shares information with partner agencies at the point of submission
- improve the process for dealing with urgent applications
- enable users to see the progress of their case and to take action to progress their case online
- provide clear signposting to support available outside HMCTS, to assist parties acting in person and without a lawyer
- enable users to upload and access documents and evidence digitally both outside and inside the courtroom
- ensure suitable facilities and support are provided at hearing centres
- enable hearings, where appropriate, to be conducted online
- provide fast digital access to outcomes of hearings
- ensure those who need it get the support they need to access our digital services.
Over coming months, the Public Law Project team will be working with practitioners and others involved in these types of case in developing practices and procedures to deliver these goals. This is an important development within the scope of the Transformation of the Justice System policy.
Further detail is at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/2018/02/07/designing-a-public-law-service-to-meet-user-needs/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=
Divorce on-line: recent developments
On January 30 2018 the Government announced that a fully online divorce application process is being tested across England and Wales for the first time. (It had been trialled in a small number of areas from 2017.)
The initial pilot allowed people seeking a divorce to use an online system which offered prompts and guidance to assist them in completing their application. But they still had to print off the form and send it to the court.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has now extended the service so that the application is now fully digital – submitting the form, sending the relevant documents, and payment. In the first week HMCTS received 130 online applications.
According to HMCTS the online system has drastically cut the number of applications being returned because of errors – showing a 90% improvement from paper forms. This is particularly important given the increasing numbers seeking a divorce without using a lawyer to help them.
Users of the new service seem to like it. It has already gained positive feedback with people welcoming the simplified, streamlined and easy to understand system which delivers their application instantly – without the worry of it being lost in the post.
The next stages will include making the system available for use by legal representatives. A date has not yet been publicly announced for this further development.
For further detail, see https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service-tests-fully-digital-divorce-application
Experience in other contexts suggests that once up and running, use of on-line application procedures will increase very rapidly. Indeed, people will wonder why this development had not occurred years ago. This sort of development is at the heart of the Transformation of our Justice System reform programme.
Financial Remedies Courts: developments in Family Justice
2018 will witness the start of a new approach to dealing with the financial matters that can arise when married couples are divorced. The current President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby has set out his ambition that disputes about financial matters should be treated quite separately from the process of getting the divorce itself.
To this end, a series of pilots is being launched in February 2018 in which, in three trial areas of the country, financial matters will be dealt with by specially trained judges in a reduced number of family court hearing centres. The courts undertaking this work will be known generally as Financial Remedies Courts.
The new system will initially be operated on a trial basis in three areas of the country: London, the Black Country and South East Wales.
The President clearly hopes that expansion of the scheme to other parts of the country will take place rapidly.
In a recent Circular, Sir James wrote:
My core ambition for financial remedy work is to improve significantly both the application of procedural justice and the delivery of substantive justice.Procedural justice will be bettered by the appointment of a cadre of specialist judges to the Financial Remedies Court (FRC) and by a process of early allocation of a case to the right judge at the right level at the right place, so as to ensure maximum efficiency. It will be bettered by the application and enforcement of standard directions and interim orders and by ensuring that FDRs (where the majority of cases settle already) are conducted with consistency, with sufficient time being allowed not only for the hearing but also for judicial preparation.The delivery of substantive justice will be improved by an improved programme of judicial training; by the reporting of judgments in small and medium cases by the judges of the FRC to promote transparency and consistency; and by ensuring that sufficient time is allowed for the preparation and conduct of final hearings.An increase in transparency will result in increased predictability of outcome, which in turn should lead to a higher rate of settlement or, for those cases that do not settle, a reduced rate of appeals.
Children Across the Justice Systems
This was the title of an extremely important and interesting lecture, given by Sir James Munby, President of the Family Court, to the Howard League for Penal Reform at the end of October 2017
What, it might be asked, was our leading family judge doing talking to those whose interest is in the criminal justice system?
Sir James used his lecture as an opportunity to argue for a new approach to the treatment of young people who come into contact with the criminal justice and penal systems. He sets out with admirable clarity what he sees as the main problems with current arrangements, including: the very complex set of institutions with which the young offender may come into contact; the huge variety of government departments – both central and local – charged with developing and delivering policy in relation to young offender; and the inconsistency of approach of different agencies towards how young offenders and their families should be dealt with.
Sir James argues that, in this context, family justice and criminal justice should be brought together. Specifically, he argues that the role of the Family Drug and Alcohol Court should be expanded to enable it to take on cases which are currently dealt with in the Youth Court.
He recognizes that such a development would represent a big policy change and could not come into being in the short-term. He therefore also proposes interim measures that might go someway towards meeting the objective he has outlined.
So far as I am aware,the Government is not currently contemplating such a major change, but I think Sir James offers ideas that should be carefully considered.
The lecture is available at https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/speech-pfd-children-across-the-justice-systems.pdf
Transforming our Justice System: Transformation – Courts and Tribunals 2022
Despite the loss of the Prisons and Courts Bill 2017 at the General Election, held in June 2017, work on the Transforming our Justice System programme continues apace. (For those aspects of the reforms which need legislation, a replacement bill is expected shortly.)
Keeping up to date with the progress that has been made is hard, as most of the changes do not hit the headlines in the media. (About the only issue which has been subject to any public discussion has been criticism from the Bar about a pilot trialling the use of courts for longer periods during the day. The criticism focussed almost entirely on the inconvenience this would cause to barristers – no mention of the possibility that the public might prefer court hearings outside the traditional 10-4 Monday-Friday time frame.)
Specific developments can be noted by keeping an eye on Press Releases from the Ministry of Justice. A recent example is the announcement of the opening of the first two Courts and Tribunals Service Centres in Birmingham and Stoke on Trent
See https://www.gov.uk/government/news/first-courts-tribunals-service-centres-launched
A more rolling source of news can be found in the extremely interesting blog relating to the transformation programme – now called Transformation: Courts and Tribunals 2022. This provides news about the new services that are being developed for modernising the courts and tribunals system, both giving accounts of what is currently on going and also what is planned.
The link to the blog is at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/category/transformation-courts-and-tribunals-2022/
It is possible to sign up to an email notification service so that you are told when a new blog entry is published.
Martin Partington: Introduction to the English Legal System 15th ed 2021
Oxford University Press Learning Link Resources
Martin Partington: Spotlight on the Justice System 