By Gabriel Princewill-
The British government must commit to sustained investment in the justice system rather than relying on short-term measures if it is serious about tackling record court backlogs and restoring public confidence in the administration of justice, the president of the Law Society has warned.
In a strongly worded intervention following the publication of a report by the Justice Select Committee, Law Society president Mark Evans argued that the pressures facing England and Wales’ courts are the result of years of underinvestment and cannot be solved simply by redistributing cases between different parts of the criminal justice system.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
”We have consistently warned that the challenges facing the courts are rooted in years of underinvestment. Evans said in an article for the Law Society’s Gazette.
Crown Court backlogs remain seriously high, whilst magistrates’ courts continue to face significant pressures. Delays leave victims waiting for closure, witnesses waiting to be heard and defendants waiting for their day in court. Justice delayed is not simply an administrative problem: it undermines confidence in a system that should provide fairness and certainty for all.
”We welcome the Justice Committee’s recognition that shifting pressure from the Crown Court to the magistrates’ courts is not a sustainable solution to the challenges facing our criminal justice system”.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
The committee’s report on court reform has intensified debate over how ministers should address mounting delays across the criminal courts. While recent proposals have focused on increasing the role of magistrates’ courts in handling criminal cases, Evans welcomed the committee’s conclusion that transferring pressure from the Crown Court is not a sustainable solution to the wider crisis.
“Court backlogs will not be solved by shifting pressure between courts,” Evans added, arguing that meaningful reform must be grounded in evidence, supported by adequate resources, and accompanied by improved access to legal representation.
The warning comes as criminal courts continue to grapple with significant delays that have persisted since the Covid-19 pandemic, compounding longer-term structural problems caused by funding constraints, staffing shortages and growing case volumes.
Successive governments have introduced a range of reform initiatives, including increased use of technology and procedural changes designed to improve efficiency, yet concerns over access to justice and court capacity remain widespread.
Evans stressed that discussions surrounding court reform often become dominated by statistics relating to sitting days, case volumes and waiting times, while overlooking the real-world impact on those caught in the system. Delays, he argued, affect victims awaiting closure, witnesses waiting to give evidence and defendants seeking a timely resolution of proceedings.
“Our courts are a vital public service, as essential to our society as schools, hospitals or transport networks,” Evans said. “When that public service is weakened, the consequences are felt far beyond courtrooms.”
A key concern highlighted by both the Law Society and the Justice Committee is the continuing fragility of the legal aid system. The committee warned that the inability of individuals facing serious criminal charges to secure legal representation risks undermining the fairness of proceedings and weakening confidence in the justice system. Evans echoed those concerns, arguing that equal access to justice remains a cornerstone of the rule of law.
The intervention also renews pressure on the government to respond fully to the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts led by Sir Brian Leveson. The review, commissioned to examine how criminal courts could operate more effectively, has become an important reference point in the debate over long-term reform. Many legal experts believe future changes should be guided by the evidence and recommendations contained within the review rather than by immediate political pressures.
Beyond legal aid, the Law Society is calling for investment across the justice system, including court buildings, judicial capacity, administrative staff, technology and legal services. Evans argued that efficiency gains cannot come at the expense of fairness and that sustainable reform requires a strategic approach encompassing the entire justice system.
Particular concern has also been raised over proposals affecting appeals from magistrates’ courts. The Justice Committee questioned plans to replace the current system of automatic rehearings with a requirement to obtain permission to appeal. Critics argue that such a change could make it more difficult to overturn wrongful decisions, especially when combined with recent proposals to expand magistrates’ sentencing powers.
According to the Law Society, weakening appeal safeguards at a time when magistrates may be asked to deal with more serious cases could increase the risk of miscarriages of justice going uncorrected.
The debate comes as Parliament continues to consider broader reforms aimed at improving the efficiency of the criminal justice system. However, Evans cautioned that there are no quick fixes to the challenges facing the courts. The underlying issue, he said, is one of capacity, staffing, infrastructure and resources. Ministers continue to seek solutions to one of the most persistent problems facing the justice system, the Justice Committee’s report has reinforced growing calls for a comprehensive strategy focused on long-term resilience rather than headline-grabbing reforms.
Inside sources at The Law Society told The Eye Of Media that the society’s objective extends beyond reducing waiting lists and clearing backlogs, to preserving public trust in a justice system that remains accessible, fair and effective for all.
Without substantial and sustained investment, legal leaders warn, the crisis in the courts is likely to endure, with consequences that reach far beyond the courtroom and into every part of society that depends on the rule of law. Backlogs that already stretch into months and, in some cases, years risk becoming entrenched, turning delayed justice into a structural feature of the system rather than an exception.
Judges and court staff continue to report growing caseloads that outpace available resources, leaving hearings rushed, adjournments more frequent, and vulnerable parties waiting longer for resolution. Legal professionals caution that this erosion of efficiency does not only frustrate litigants; it undermines confidence in the justice system itself.
The ripple effects extend into policing, social services, and the wider economy. Criminal cases delayed through congested courts can leave victims without closure and defendants in prolonged legal uncertainty, while civil disputes tied up in backlog can stall business activity, housing decisions, and financial settlements.
Family courts are particularly strained, with delays in safeguarding hearings and custody disputes adding emotional pressure to already difficult situations. Over time, these pressures risk creating a two-tier experience of justice, where those with greater resources can navigate delays more effectively than those without.
Experts argue that without targeted funding for staffing, digital infrastructure, and procedural reform, the system will continue to operate under unsustainable strain. The concern is not only operational but constitutional: prolonged delay in justice risks weakening public trust in the principle that courts should provide timely and fair resolution for all.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar