Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Insurance UK newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360, London (March 31, 2020, 7:51 PM BST) -- Criminal trials in Scotland will be conducted without juries for up to 18 months under emergency legislation to tackle the coronavirus outbreak set to go before Scottish lawmakers on Wednesday, which lawyers described as an ill-advised "knee-jerk reaction" caused by panic.
Individual judges will decide the outcome of serious trials under measures being pushed through in the Coronavirus (Scotland) Bill that will give the Scottish government the power to order trials without a jury in cases deemed "necessary and proportionate."
"The procedure to have solemn trials without a jury is in the bill, but there are many safeguards," said Scotland's constitution secretary Michael Russell. "These are exceptional powers and, if they are used, they have to be used exceptionally carefully."
The proposals — which include powers for the government to release some prisoners early, extend the time limit for criminal proceedings and allow judges to take pre-recorded witness statements that won't face cross examination — were heavily criticized by Scottish lawyers.
The Scottish Criminal Bar Association, which represents counsel in Scotland, said the proposals were an "attack on principles that have been built over 600 years and are at the very cornerstone of Scotland's criminal justice system."
"These measures are premature, disproportionate and ill-advised. They are at best a knee jerk reaction to an as yet unquantified problem instigated by panic, and at worst something far more sinister," the association said in its response to the bill.
The changes should not remove the "fundamental principle" of individuals charged with a serious criminal offence to a trial by a jury of their peers, within a reasonable time, the response said.
"These proposals will mean that we would descend in one fell swoop from a jury of fifteen to a jury of one, and that jury of one would also decide matters of law and sentence," the association said. "That, for all intents and purposes, amounts to a form of summary justice."
The bill marks a departure from the approach taken by the judiciary in England and Wales, where all jury trials were temporarily halted on Mar. 23 until they can be held safely, building on an earlier decision to only permit jury trials that lasted up to three days.
The U.K. Ministry of Justice had previously insisted courts would be kept open despite the government advising citizens to work from home and avoid socializing to stem the spread of COVID-19, particularly in London.
Courts in Scotland and Northern Ireland had already put a stop to new jury trials.
Now, just 157 court and tribunal buildings in England and Wales will be open for face-to-face hearings, representing 42% of the 370 crown, magistrates, county and family courts and tribunals across the country, under plans to consolidate work into fewer buildings to help "maintain a core justice system."
--Editing by Alyssa Miller.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
