A single Lay Magistrate sitting on his or her own has very limited powers. However, they are able to issue search warrants and warrants for arrests and conduct Early Administrative Hearings.
Magistrates are empowered to try summary cases, such as cases without Jury. Additionally, however, they may deal with cases which can either be tried summarily by the magistrate, or which can be tried on indictment before a jury in the Crown Court. These cases are called “Either Way”
In relation to offences tried “either way” magistrate’s courts have increased sentencing powers. Although, in these circumstances, the maximum prison sentence that can be awarded in relation to a single offence is still six months, in cases they can impose consecutive prison sentences up to a maximum of twelve months if more than one offence is involved. The Judiciary can also impose a maximum fine of £5000.
Stipendiary Magistrates or district judges are quite different to Lay Magistrates they are highly paid and have a lot of training, and are legally qualified being required under the Justices of Peace Act 1997, to be a barrister or solicitor for at least seven standing that is a right of audience as an advocate. Under s.16 (3) of the Justices of the Peace Act 1979 it states they have the same powers as a bench of Magistrates, but they only have to sit on there own and do not have to have a clerk sitting with them unlike the lay Magistrates.
Magistrates have a wide workload which is mainly connected to criminal cases, although they also deal with some civil matters for example, Adoption, Licensing laws, and especially family cases. They try 97% of all criminal and deal with preliminary hearings in the remaining 3% of all. This will involve remand hearings, bail applications and committal proceedings which are committed to crown court. They will also deal with civil matters which include the enforcing of debts owed to utilities meaning gas, electricity, and water, non payment of council tax and non payment of television licenses. In addition to this they have the power to grant licensing for the sale of alcohol and licenses for betting and gaming establishments. Specially nominated and trained justices form the youth court panel to hear criminal charges against young offender aged 10 to 17 years old. These magistrates must be under 65 and a panel usually must include on man and one woman, to get the gender balance equal. There is also a special panel for the Family Court to hear family cases including orders for protection against violence, affiliation cases, and proceedings under the Children Act 1989. Lay Magistrates also sit in the Crown Court to hear appeals from the Magistrate’s Court. In these cases the lay Justices form a panel with a qualified Judge.
The training of Lay magistrates is supervised by the Magistrate’s Committee of the Judicial Studies Board, they have drawn up. When the magistrates are first appointed have to complete induction training within the first three months, this usually lasts up to about 16 hours and include observing cases in court and taking part in workshops on basic court procedures. In their second and third year on the bench they must do a further eight hours training from a list of topics provided by the Judicial Studies Board. All magistrates have to do then is attend refresher courses of at least 12 hours every three years, these are usually weekend courses. The standard training has been criticised as it tends to vary from region to region. Even though there is a syllabus for the train magistrates to follow there no national training program.
Amongst these criticisms there have been many more made about the Magistracy. About 1500 new lay Magistrates are appointed each year, to one commission area only. The Lord Chancellor’s department makes the appointments. In order to decide whom to appoint the Lord Chancellor relies on recommendations made to him by the local advisory committees and this method of appointment is much criticised as the members tend to be current or ex – Justices of the Peace and often the Lord Lieutenant of the Country is the Chairman of the committee, so therefore they tend to choose people like themselves.
Magistrates should represent the whole community. Names of potential magistrates can be put forward by anyone. Proposals for office tend to be generated by local interest group, such as political parties and such like bodies. This limited constituency may give rise to the view that the magistracy only represents the attitudes of a limited section of society. It is essential that the magistrate’s court should reflect the composition of the wider society and the rules relating to the appointment do, at least in theory, support this conclusion. Nonetheless, there still remains a lingering doubt that the magistracy still represents the values of a limited section of the society.
The traditional image of the Lay Justices is that they are “middle – class, middle age and middle minded”. This image is to a certain extent true. Most Magistrates are in the45 to 65 age bracket. Magistrates under the age 40 are still rare. The majority are supporters of the conservative party; this is so even in areas where there is a high labour vote. Figures that have been issued by the Lord Chancellor’s Department in 1992 showed that in St Helens, Lancashire only 26% of the magistrates supported Labour even though the labour party had taken 60% of the votes in the general election. Ethnic Minorities are under represented also. There is only about 2% of the bench coming from ethnic minority backgrounds, this is still occurs despite an effort to persuade more people to put themselves forward for appointment and an increase in the numbers that are appointed each year. The Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons reported in 1996 that a balance had not yet been achieved in the Magistracy. The one area in which there is now near parity is in the number of male and female lay justices. There had been a steady increase of the number of women over the last few years so that from making up 37% of the magistracy in 1978 women now account for 49% of lay magistrates.
Their social background could influence their economic position and both their social background and economic position could influence their political standpoint.
Those who are politically right wing would tend to favor harsh discipline approaches to crime. And those politically left wing are more likely to adopt a more empathetic attitude to the criminal.
They should have local knowledge of particular problems in the area. However as most magistrates come from the professional and managerial classes, it is unlikely that they live in, or have any real knowledge of the problems in the poorer areas. As the chairman of the Mid – Staffordshire Magistrates Bench stated in a local newspaper, although previously rank and social position were the main qualification nowadays,
“It is important a bench has a balance of sexes, professions and political allegiances”
A study of sentencing by Liberty showed that in 1990 twice as many defendants were being sent to prison by magistrates in Greater Manchester compared to the neighboring area of mersyside. It is also interesting that a study by Professor Diamond in 1991 found that Lay Magistrates were more lenient in the sentences they passed than stipendiary Magistrates. It is often said that lay magistrates tend to be prosecution – biased, believing the police too readily. However, part of the training is aimed at eliminating this type of bias. It is also true that at courts outside London they will see the same Crown Prosecution Service prosecutor more frequently and this could affect their judgment.
There is the fact that comparatively few defendants appeal against the magistrate’s decision and many of the appeals are against sentence and not against the finding of guilt. There are also very few appeals by way case, stated by the Queens Bench Divisional Court. Of the appeals to the Crown Court, rather less than half of the appeals are usually successful. This is out of a total workload of over 1.5 million criminal cases dealt with in the Magistrates Courts. From this it can be argued that despite the amateur status of Lay Magistrates, and despite all the problems, they do a remarkably good job.
