𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Scrapping jury trials would hand power to a judiciary which has been “captured by identity politics”, according to an MP alarmed by the pro-equality guidance handed to judges. Jack Rankin is appalled by Justice Secretary David Lammy’s reported plans to restrict jury trail to the most serious cases such as murder, manslaughter and rape in the face of a giant backlog.

He is concerned by the contents of the 335-page “Equal Treatment Bench Book” which describes “judicial diversity” as “vitally important”. It also stresses the importance of “recognising and eliminating” a “judge’s own prejudices” and urges them to identify “disadvantage”.

Mr Rankin is concerned by the guidance that “fair treatment does not mean treating everyone in the same way” and fears it prioritises feelings over facts.

Defending the traditional system of jury trials, he said: “The right to trial by a jury of peers can be traced from the Anglo Saxons through to Magna Carta and beyond. It’s in this country’s DNA.”

He warned that if juries are removed for the vast majority of cases they will be replaced by a “judiciary captured by identity politics underpinned by documents like the Equal Treatment Bench Book”.

Mr Rankin said: “This guidance is everything that’s wrong with the judicial system in this country. It shows just how endemic Left-wing, identity politics has become and it’s why the public feel so disconnected from certain judgements.”

Mr Lammy, who is also Deputy Prime Minister, has been expected to seek to end jury trials for most cases where the defendant could be imprisoned for up to five years – but there are reports Labour may row back in the face of internal opposition. The proposals come as Crown Courts in England and Wales have more than 78,000 uncompleted cases in an unprecedented backlog.

The Government will face strong opposition if it pushes ahead to make more cases heard by a “judge alone”.

The Windsor MP said he had been told by members of the legal profession “how the selections process filters out anyone with sensible, common-sense views”.

He said: “This comes as no surprise when Keir Starmer and those human rights lawyers who surround him believe judges rather than elected politicians should be deciding the laws of the land. This stuff is baked into the system; it’s part of the ‘guidelinification’ of law in this country.

“To think that the public would want to see further power handed to judges is for the birds.”

The Judicial College, which publishes the Bench Book, was invited to comment.