The Magistrates’ Association has repeated its calls for reforms to the Single Justice Procedure (SJP) to make it more consistent, more open and fairer, with better safeguards to protect more vulnerable defendants. In its response to the government’s review of the regulation of private prosecutors, the membership body for magistrates in England and Wales has made recommendations in key areas that it believes will improve transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the SJP, as well as in private prosecutors more generally.
Tom Franklin, chief executive of the Magistrates’ Association said:
“Private prosecutions have big impacts on people’s lives. Magistrates need confidence that prosecutors are working to the highest standards and in a consistent way. There have been well-publicised examples recently which have cast doubt on this, which is why it is right to review the regulations, and the assurances that can be given to courts that procedures have been followed. So, we welcome this consultation’s proposals to make private prosecutors more accountable, and we’re especially pleased with its focus on their use of the Single Justice Procedure (SJP).
“While the Single Justice Procedure delivers efficient, speedy justice for thousands – reducing court backlogs and enabling more serious cases to be heard in court more quickly – it needs to be more open to scrutiny and have better safeguards to protect more vulnerable defendants. That is why in our response to the consultation, we are calling for fundamental reform of both the oversight and regulation of private prosecutors, as well as the statutory code of conduct for private prosecutors, overseen by an independent regulator with teeth. These steps, if taken, will improve transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the SJP, as well as in private prosecutors more generally.
“To further rebuild public confidence in SJP, in our response we also reiterate our recommendation from our March 2024 review of the Single Justice Procedure – that prosecutors must read all pleas and mitigations to assess whether their prosecution is in the public interest before the case comes before a magistrate.
“We believe that individuals with protected characteristics, including physical or mental disability, age and pregnancy status, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of private prosecution, especially when this involves household utilities. We believe that reasonable adjustments should be provided throughout the private prosecution process, including support about how to best manage proceedings. Private prosecutors must assess an individual’s vulnerability, and this information should inform the public interest decision.”
The Magistrates’ Association’s recommendations include:
- Reform of the oversight and regulations of private prosecutors to improve transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the SJP.
- A statutory code of conduct for private prosecutors, overseen by an independent regulator invested with powers to suspend or withdraw private prosecutor’s licenses if they contravene the code.
- A separation of function between those who investigate cases and those who make the decision to prosecute and undertake the prosecution. This mirrors public prosecution procedures.
- All private prosecution cases should be subjected to an evidential test and public interest test before a decision to prosecute is made. There should be a mandatory requirement for prosecutors to read all pleas and mitigations to assess whether the prosecution is in the public interest before the case comes before magistrates.
- It should be mandatory for private prosecutors to assess an individual’s vulnerability as part of their engagement with the defendant. This information should inform the public interest decision.
- Private prosecutors should be required to register with HMCTS prior to bringing a prosecution and to publish their own data on the prosecutions they bring. Organisations should report quarterly to the Ministry of Justice, who should publish quantitative and qualitative data. Organisations should also be required to include prosecution statistics and more in-depth information as part of their annual report.
The full response can be found here.
Last year, the association published a position statement on the SJP, reflecting hundreds of its members’ insights into hearing SJP cases. It called for SJP reform and published 12 recommendations to improve its operation, transparency and fairness.
