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 (April 1, 2020, 3:44 PM BST) -- The Scottish government on Wednesday backed off plans to hold criminal trials without juries under emergency legislation designed to combat the spread of the novel coronavirus, a day after lawyers and lawmakers denounced the plan as shortsighted.
In an address to Scottish lawmakers Wednesday morning, constitutional affairs Secretary Mike Russell confirmed that the controversial proposals had been withdrawn following opposition from the legal industry and politicians on Tuesday.
The plan would have allowed individual judges and sheriffs — Scotland's trial judges — to determine the verdict of serious trials without a jury in cases deemed "necessary and proportionate."
But Russell said Wednesday that the government had temporarily scrapped the idea to allow for a discussion with victims and legal professionals "about the right way to ensure that justice continues to be done in Scotland."
The plans were pulled to allow lawmakers to vote on a broader emergency bill for public services struggling to deal with the virus outbreak. Russell said the measures would be reintroduced at a later date "to allow an intensive and wide-ranging discussion" with everyone affected.
The proposals, which would have lasted for up to 18 months, included powers to release some prisoners early, for the time limit of criminal proceedings to be extended and to allow judges to take pre-recorded witness statements that wouldn't face cross examination.
But the measures met fierce resistance from Scottish lawyers, who blasted them as a "knee-jerk reaction" on Tuesday. The Scottish Criminal Bar Association, which represents counsel in Scotland, had criticized the proposals as an "attack on principles that have been built over 600 years and are at the very cornerstone of Scotland's criminal justice system."
The sharp reversal comes after the Law Society of Scotland issued a briefing to lawmakers on Tuesday night that the bill would make "one of the most fundamental changes to our justice system ever considered."
The organization's president, John Mulholland, wrote that the backlog of cases wasn't so pressing as to warrant "extraordinary measures."
On Wednesday, Mulholland welcomed the reversal, saying he felt reassured that lawmakers had heard lawyers' concerns.
"We look forward to engaging positively with the Scottish government and partners as they investigate practical ways to ensure that justice can continue to be carried out effectively during the outbreak," Mulholland said.
The bill would mark a departure from the approach taken by the judiciary in England and Wales, where all jury trials have been halted temporarily since March 23, following attempts to keep short trials going.
Lawmakers in Westminster were among those to object to Scotland's measures, with Tory cabinet minister Michael Gove calling the idea "deeply concerning."
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.
--Additional reporting by Richard Crump. Editing by Alyssa Miller.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
