A controversial fast-track justice system needs reforming, a Cabinet minister has conceded after a Standard investigation revealed harsh penalties dished out to elderly and vulnerable people.
Justice Secretary Alex Chalk admitted that the court process allowing certain offences to be prosecuted behind-closed-doors may need reforming, amid concerns from magistrates.
Mr Chalk said "fairness is non-negotiable" for the single justice procedure (SJP) before telling MPs he believes there is an "issue about transparency".
He claimed the SJP "works well" but accepted there is a need to consider "whether it ought to be refined", with Conservative MP Andy Carter noting that some vulnerable defendants submit powerful mitigation that is not seen by prosecutors.
Offences dealt with under the SJP include using a television without a licence, dodging train fares, driving without car insurance, speeding and truancy.
It allows magistrates to handle non-custodial criminal prosecutions in private rather than open court, although a defendant always has the option to attend their hearing in person.
Around 40,000 criminal cases are dealt with through SJPs each month and 3,102,392 criminal cases were received into the Single Justice Service platform between April 1 2019 and September 30 2023.
But an Evening Standard investigation has revealed a shocking list of cases brought under the SJP, including elderly pensioners, cancer patients, and people with severe learning difficulties being convicted and fined behind-closed-doors.
One recent case involved the DVLA prosecuting an 85-year-old woman from Berkhamsted, Herts for not paying car insurance, in an SJP case brought after she suffered a broken neck and was admitted to a care home.
Her circumstances were fully laid out in a mitigation letter to the court from her son, but prosecuting bodies frequently do not see letters like this due to the speed of the system. The DVLA did not withdraw the case, and the pensioner was subsequently issued with a criminal conviction by the magistrate.
Mr Chalk’s statement comes a day after a major intervention from the Magistrates' Association, warning that SJP "needs reform" and "there are concerns" that cases are being brought before magistrates without prosecutors, such as the DVLA or TV Licensing, reading mitigations.
Politicians from Labour and the Conservatives have called for a review of the system in response to the Standard’s reporting, while the Society of Editors said on Tuesday that SJP hearings must be opened up to journalists to restore faith in justice.
Warrington South MP Mr Carter, who sits as a magistrate on the Merseyside Bench, told justice questions in the Commons: "The minister will have seen some recent journalistic reporting in relation to single justice procedure, which is an important element of the magistrates' work.
"The principle behind the single justice procedure is good. I've sat on cases myself in SJP courts, but there are some concerns, particularly around vulnerable individuals who may have mitigation that is not necessarily being addressed.
"Does he agree with me that perhaps he can remind members on the bench that magistrates can already use their discretion to refer cases back to open court where prosecutors can review cases to ensure that individuals who are vulnerable are not served with injustice?"
Mr Chalk replied: "On the single justice procedure, fairness is non-negotiable so it is absolutely critical that every person who comes before the court - whether it's via the SJP or open court - gets that fairness.
"I do think there is an issue about transparency, I think some important points have been raised and echoed by the chair of the Justice Select Committee (Conservative MP Sir Bob Neill).
"I think that's something we ought to look at recalibrating.
"Everyone accepts the SJP procedure works well and is a useful addition, we just need to see whether it ought to be refined in the interests of promoting transparency."
Earlier this month, justice minister Lord Bellamy said in response to a written Parliamentary question that the government has “no plans to amend SJP”.
But the mood appears to have shifted in the Ministry of Justice, especially after the Magistrates’ Association statement calling for significant changes.
A consultation was carried out last year into open justice, which included questions on transparency in the single justice procedure. The results of the consultation have not yet been announced.
