Norfolk barrister says judicial autonomy could be lost via Govt. plan
The justice secretary's to get personal approval of - and the power to veto - any changes to sentencing guidelines issued to judges
A barrister who work in the county tells us decades of experience and judicial independence could be lost under new plans.
The justice secretary will now have the final say over upcoming changes to sentencing guidelines issued to judges.
"The Justice Secretary doesn't even have to be a qualified lawyer to hold the role"
Simon Spence KC is from Red Lion Chambers and works across East Anglia
"The sentencing guideline counsel is chaired by a very senior court of appeal judge, it's made up of a number of different people from all different kind of legal areas, including probation.
"It's also worth considering that in this day age, the Justice Secretary doesn't even have to be a qualified lawyer to hold the role"
"We have seen in recent months and years, a lot of very high-profile cases where sentences imposed by judges, who heard the trial and are hugely experienced, are criticised by politicians who haven't heard the trial and are only taking this action for political reasons".
The proposals in more detail:
Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she wanted to "right the democratic deficit that has been uncovered" by introducing a requirement for any new rules to be approved by her.
It comes after ministers intervened to block updated Sentencing Council guidance which would have meant judges should consider the background of offenders from certain minority groups when deciding on a punishment.
Under new rules announced on Tuesday, the independent Council, which is made up of some of the most senior legal figures in England and Wales, will be unable to issue any changes without ministerial oversight.
Both the Justice Secretary and the Lady Chief Justice, who is the head of the judiciary, will need to give the green light in order for a new directive to be finalised.
The Government insisted the new powers do not interfere with the independence of judges but seek to ensure a "democratic lock" and block the Council from "setting policy without the involvement of Parliament."
The changes will be brought in as part of the Sentencing Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on Tuesday.
Also written into the legislation are measures aimed at tackling prison overcrowding, including what the Ministry of Justice describes as "Texas-style earned release sentences."
The Justice Secretary said: "Individual sentencing decisions will always be the responsibility of the independent judiciary - and this is something I will staunchly defend.
"However, policy must be set by parliamentarians, who answer to the people.
"Government and Parliament have a legitimate role in setting the sentencing framework. It is right that we now have greater democratic and judicial oversight of the direction of the Council's work and the final guidelines they publish."
Earlier this year, Ms Mahmood had asked the Council to reconsider its guidance for judges but it rejected her request, arguing the rules would ensure the courts had the "most comprehensive information available" to hand out a punishment.
Under the proposed rules, a pre-sentence report would have usually been necessary before deciding punishment for someone of an ethnic, cultural or faith minority, alongside other groups such as young adults aged 18 to 25, women and pregnant women.
Both the Opposition and the Government criticised the change, suggesting it left open the prospect of what they termed "two-tier" justice.
The guidelines were abandoned after ministers tabled an emergency law to override them.