WRITTEN EVIDENCE
SUBMITTED BY
THE MAGISTRATES'
ASSOCIATION (LOCO 14)
JUDICIAL POLICY AND PRACTICE COMMITTEE
INTRODUCTION
There are three main issues that concern the Magistrates'
Association when considering the question of localism. These are:
¾ The
concept of local justice.
¾ The
management of magistrates' courts.
¾ Community
engagement.
1. The concept of local justice
Magistrates have their origins in communities and
for most of their history a link to a community has been an essential
prerequisite for the selection of magistrates. The definition
of local and community may have changed significantly over the
650 years of the Magistrates' Courts and may now mean different
things to different people, depending on their own location, but
the concept of crime being dealt with in the area in which it
is committed remains fundamental to the criminal justice system.
The Association therefore believes that summary justice
should be rooted in communities and actions taken by the justice
system both to try to prevent offending and to deter re-offending
should be taken at a local level. The magistrates' courts have
an essential part to play in delivering this local justice in
an open democratic and participative manner.
Wherever possible magistrates have links to communities
or knowledge of them and whenever possible, trials in magistrates'
courts should be heard by a bench constituted of such magistrates.
As in so many other areas of public life, the arrival
of greater mobility in society has changed the nature of communities.
Magistrates may well come from within the very community where
offences are committed, or from slightly further afield, but this
does not detract from the importance and effectiveness of local
justice. The very diversity of the magistracy is of real benefit—magistrates
are selected, trained, developed and appraised to a much higher
level than was known even 20 years ago. They are equipped to deal
with matters ranging from those where local knowledge might be
beneficial to the understanding of a case being dealt with—through
to those where such knowledge is unnecessary.
Nevertheless, as the move by some local authorities
to develop Community Justice Panels (often linked to the notion
of restorative justice) and the previous government's initiative
relating to community courts (where North Liverpool and Salford
remain the best known examples) exemplify, there is an important
role for criminal justice to be seen to be closely involved in
and with local communities.
The criminal justice system belongs to the people
it serves. Magistrates are such people. Magistrates' courts
also operate in an open and transparent manner that is an essential
feature of a criminal justice system in a true democracy.
2. Management of magistrates' courts
Magistrates' courts form the focus for community
justice. Magistrates deal with all summary crime cases brought
to court, a significant percentage of either-way criminal offences
as well as family matters and certain other civil cases. Magistrates'
courts have always had a strong link to their local areas—however
in recent years, that link has been weakened as control has moved
from local Magistrates' Courts' Committees (MCCs) which were closely
linked to local authorities, to amalgamations of MCCs particularly
in Metropolitan Areas and now to HMCS, an agency within the Ministry
of Justice.
This link has become even more remote with the addition
of the Regional and Area management layers of HMCS. In little
more than 10 years the management of the business of a court has
been removed from complete local control to a complete lack of
local control to such an extent that anecdotes are told across
the country of the inability to make simple local changes within
a court (eg changing light bulbs) without several strata of HMCS
becoming involved.
It is the view of the Association that not only would
the removal of one or more of these layers be financially beneficial,
but the management operation of local courts would not suffer,
and there would inevitably be an increased local involvement between
the community and the local criminal justice system.
The Magistrates' Association would strongly urge
that the administration of local courts, especially that of youth
courts, is taken away from the central control of HMCS and returned
to a form of local governance which allows for the involvement
of magistrates in the management of their courts.
HMCS already accepts the principle that there should
normally be a court within no more than one hour of travel by
public transport. To meet this target would require a change of
the HMCS policy of maximising courtroom utilisation and a fundamental
reappraisal of the resultant estates driven court closure proposals.
County market towns and their surrounding rural hinterland do
not need a courtroom functioning five days a week but do benefit,
directly and indirectly, from the presence of an operating magistrates'
court.
3. Community Engagement
The Magistrates' Association's MIC (Magistrates in
the Community) project already provides opportunities for judicial
engagement with communities—with schools, neighbourhood
schemes, local councils, employers etc. This is an inexpensive
programme but is already under threat because of HMCS budget cuts
affecting court open days, school visits and other engagement
activities. Cuts in funding should not be allowed to compromise
this highly successful and effective programme. There should be
a budgeted marketing programme for community engagement to ensure
consistent national and local awareness and to encourage communities
to become involved.
Local authorities and other bodies should be sensible
to the need to promote the magistracy and all its functions, to
the whole community they serve. The Association's MIC project
and the associated schemes Local Crime, Community Sentence (LCCS)
and the Mock Trial Competition have helped to introduce the role
of the court in society, and the involvement of citizens in administering
justice, to a wide audience within its limited funding.
This has been of real benefit because it has opened
up the workings of the Criminal Justice System to the community.
It is our view that one of the main reasons for a lack of confidence
in the criminal justice system has been lack of knowledge. Informing
the public at local level as well as a national level is a key
to a greater understanding of the system and how it works. Consistently
our statistics indicate an increase in public confidence following
any one of our presentations. This should be maintained and properly
funded at local and national level.
Historically, the media also have a significant part
to play as it is often media output on which the public opinion
is based, whether right or wrong. Despite the relative demise
of the local press, the development of new technologies makes
it easier than ever to communicate accurate outcomes from the
decisions of courts and this should be progressed on a local basis.
4. Summary
We welcome the opportunity to respond to this consultation
because we are rooted in local communities. Our members are competent,
well trained and regularly appraised in their roles. They give
their time freely to the criminal justice system and accordingly
we on their behalf would welcome any steps to move us closer to
the communities we serve both in terms of communication and control.
If second tier councils are to be the key building
block in addressing the issue of localism then summary justice
ought to be aligned with that tier of local government.
September 2010
| 
