Every day, the Magistrates’ Association (MA) advocates on behalf of its members. Our national officers, together with our five policy committees and supported by our small staff team, cover a wide range of issues that matter most to our members and represent the organisation on external bodies. We also speak to the media on our members’ behalf about the issues that matter and clear up as many misconceptions about magistrates and their work as we can.
Since our last advocacy update in May, we have prioritised a number of issues.
The Independent review of sentencing
In May we welcomed the publication of David Gauke’s sentencing review, saying that it promised a “…fresh approach to sentencing, which is undoubtedly needed to deal with the crisis in the criminal justice system.”
We were pleased that many of our proposals became recommendations in the report, including our call for a system-wide shift that empowers courts with flexible and creative tools to address offending at its roots, as well as the presumption against short custodial sentences of less than 12 months – we have long said that they are counter-productive for many offenders and rarely effective in reducing reoffending and, indeed the proportion of people in custody on short sentences has fallen significantly over the past decade.
Criminal courts review report: our response
In February, we’d published our initial response to Brian Leveson’s Criminal Courts Review – saying that magistrates were ready to take on a greater role, handling less‑serious cases locally to reduce crown court backlogs. We recommended extending magistrates’ sentencing powers in the adult courts to 24 months and transferring decision‑making over “either‑way” case allocation to the first hearing at magistrates’ courts.
In July, we welcomed Sir Brian Leveson’s Criminal Courts Review. We said his bold recommendations, especially the creation of a new Criminal Court Bench Division, offer real hope for speeding up justice for victims, witnesses and defendants. Beattie noted that “justice delayed is justice denied,” and that magistrates are ready and willing to support these reforms, even undertaking additional training if needed.
You can read our full consultation response to find out more.
Governance consultation
Also in July, we published our response to the Senior Presiding Judge’s consultation on the governance of the magistracy.
We said that reform is welcome, but only if it strengthens the voice of magistrates, makes structures more transparent, and ensures decisions are taken at the lowest appropriate level. We supported the creation of a new Magistrates’ Courts Oversight Group with real decision-making power, backed by focused subcommittees. We also said regional structures should be streamlined into Regional Judicial Business and Leadership Groups, but warned these must not become too large or high-level to address day-to-day issues such as deployment, training and morale.
It is important that local governance remains visible and practical. We backed the creation of Bench Business and Leadership Groups to provide clear escalation routes, while protecting space for welfare-focused conversations. We were clear that the Magistrates’ Leadership Executive, in its current form, lacks legitimacy and must undergo fundamental reform, with roles elected and accountable to magistrates.
We stress that governance reform must be values-led, not just structurally neat. Magistrates must see their input reflected in decisions, and feel empowered to lead within the new system.
Annual Judicial Diversity statistics
The Ministry of Justice releases figures each July on the diversity of the judiciary and legal professionals. For magistrates, the data covers those recruited to the magistracy over the year, those who have left, and those already in post, and shows that the magistracy remains the most diverse part of the judiciary.
That being said, there is more that can be done to improve the diversity of the magistracy, particularly around ethnic and age diversity. Our chief executive Tom Franklin called for a renewed focus on removing barriers to recruitment and retention of a more diverse magistracy, in particular by: reforming the magistrates expenses system, better data and transparency, greater flexibility in sitting arrangements, a magistrates’ Volunteer Charter, ensuring structural reforms support diversity efforts, and a comprehensive recruitment and retention strategy for magistrates.
For more analysis of the data itself, please look out for our article on the judicial diversity statistics in the next edition of Magistrate magazine, due out on 5 September.
Improving Family Court Services Inquiry
Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee has launched an inquiry into improving family court services for children. This follows a report from the National Audit Office (NAO) published earlier this year which identified severe delays in the family courts, with families waiting almost a year for decisions to be made, on average. The committee heard oral evidence from representatives of the MOJ, HMCTS, Cafcass and the Department for Education. The MA submitted written evidence prior to the oral evidence session and we will continue to keep members informed of the inquiry’s progress.
Our response to the tagging ‘scandal’
In June, we responded to serious concerns about the tagging system, raised in a Channel 4 News investigation. We said magistrates must be able to rely on non-custodial options if they are to use them with confidence. Tags must be fitted promptly, breaches must be identified, and consequences must follow quickly. Mark Beattie, our National Chair, warned that if these conditions are not met, magistrates and victims cannot trust the system, and this is especially worrying in domestic abuse cases where protection is paramount.
It is important that community sentences remain a credible alternative to custody. Without confidence in tagging, magistrates are left with fewer effective options, undermining both sentencing flexibility and the government’s wider ambition to expand community disposals.
We stress that there must be a comprehensive review of tagging before any further expansion of the programme. Magistrates need clarity on the scale of the problem, reassurance that weaknesses are being addressed, and confidence that future use of tagging will be robust, reliable, and fit for purpose.
Our response to the spending review
In June, we responded to the Government’s spending review. We welcomed the additional investment in probation and the Crown Prosecution Service that were announced, recognising that better-resourced probation staff are essential for magistrates to make effective use of community-based sentencing.
However, we stressed that key gaps remain – for example, that there were no measures to address the shortage of legal advisers, which has led to up to one in ten sittings being cancelled, and expressed our disappointment at the lack of commitment to recruit the 6,000 additional magistrates needed over the next few years, and no funding for dilapidated magistrates’ court buildings.
The MA also warned against “efficiency savings” that risk repeating past mistakes where cost-cutting increased delays.
Magistrates matter: reform needed to keep magistrates in post
In June, we published a new report on magistrates’ recognition. The MA’s new report Magistrates matter: A plan to ensure magistrates are valued, appreciated, and recognised sets out the hidden costs and challenges of volunteering as a magistrate. Despite handling over 90 per cent of criminal cases, magistrates often feel neglected, undervalued, and out of pocket; our report found that these pressures that are driving resignations and threaten recruitment.
The report makes seven recommendations, including a multi-year recruitment and retention strategy, a Magistrates’ Long Service Medal, and a Volunteer Charter.
We have met with Shaun Davies MP, who is leading a cross-party campaign for a Magistrates’ Long Service Medal, and we are engaging with the Ministry of Justice to press for a comprehensive approach to magistrate recognition, beyond one-off gestures, that addresses the structural issues undermining morale and retention.
Single Justice Procedure: continuing work
We continue to defend magistrates publicly when they are unfairly blamed for systemic failings. Most recently, the BBC was criticised after suggesting magistrates are at fault for convictions in the fast-track Single Justice Procedure (SJP). The BBC has opposed reforms that would require prosecutors – such as TV Licensing and the DVLA – to read mitigation letters before proceeding with prosecutions, arguing this would be “impractical” and “inefficient.” Instead, it claimed magistrates should bear responsibility for intervening.
We responded, making clear that prosecutors have a duty to ensure their cases pass the public interest test before reaching court. As our Chief Executive Tom Franklin stated: “Cases should not be coming to court if they do not pass this public interest test – causing distress to vulnerable defendants, and clogging up overburdened courts.”
We have also published a detailed response to BBC coverage of the SJP, emphasising that magistrates take pleas and personal circumstances seriously, weighing them carefully against the facts of each case and sentencing guidelines. Our 12-point reform plan sets out how the system can be improved, including ensuring only experienced magistrates deal with SJP cases and providing better training within the judiciary.
We are continuing to engage with stakeholders across Parliament, government, and the justice system, and will keep you apprised of any updates.
Media coverage
Since the end of May, we have secured dozens of pieces of media coverage on topics including the Independent sentencing review, the Single Justice Procedure, magistrates’ recognition and much more.
In May, our comments on the Independent review of Sentencing were picked-up by MSN UK, Solicitors Journal, Parliament News, and others.
In early June, during Volunteers Week and following our contact with him, Shaun Davies (the MP for Telford) asked the Lord Chancellor during Justice Questions in Parliament, about establishing a long service medal to be established for magistrates, calling them the “backbone of our justice system.” Responding, the Lord Chancellor said she would continue discussions into how the government could “acknowledge that brilliant service even more.”
Also during Volunteers Week in June, we launched our Magistrates Matter report into improving the recognition of the magistracy. Our spokespeople gave interviews to the media, including on Times Radio, BBC Wales and LBC, as well as articles about the report appearing in the Times, Law Society Gazette, Police Oracle, and the Shropshire Star.
Later in June our comments on the government’s spending review were covered by CityAM and the BBC, and our recommendations for reform of the Single Justice Procedure were covered by BBC Radio 4 and the Evening Standard.
July saw media coverage of our response to the Leveson enquiry in the Guardian, BBC ITV News, Times Radio and LBC, as well as a large number of regional and local newspapers, websites and radio stations.
And in August, we fielded questions from the national media, asking how long it might take for the cases of those arrested during the Palestine Action protests to be heard, and whether their cases would be in the magistrates’ courts or crown courts. Our response? That it was too early to tell, but that we felt it was likely that many of the cases would be heard in the crown courts, rather than magistrates’ courts.
