Justice Secretary Lammy Announces AI Expansion in Courts Amid Jury Trial Reduction Plans
Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary David Lammy has confirmed his intention to significantly increase the use of artificial intelligence within the judicial system, while simultaneously reducing the number of jury trials conducted across England and Wales. Speaking at a Microsoft AI event in London, Lammy revealed that members of the judiciary have already begun utilizing AI tools, and he now wants "to see more AI" implemented throughout the court system.
AI Initiatives Already Underway in Justice System
Lammy detailed several existing AI applications within the justice system, highlighting how technology has already saved approximately 25,000 hours of administrative time. In the probation system, AI has been used to transcribe more than 150,000 meetings between offenders and officers. "We're testing transcription in the courts and tribunals based on the same technology," Lammy explained.
The Justice Secretary further revealed that some immigration and asylum judges are already using AI to help formulate notes and write remarks, while magistrates' courts are piloting AI for legal advisers and district judges to speed up case progression through transcription and judgment summarization.
Government Investment in "Justice AI" Project
As part of this technological push, Lammy announced that the government would ramp up investment in its "in-house justice AI unit." This commitment comes despite recent controversies surrounding AI tools, including Sky News revelations that at least 21 police forces continued using Microsoft's Copilot tool despite documented issues with AI hallucinations.
Darren Hardman, Chief Executive of Microsoft UK, praised the Ministry of Justice as "one of the fastest-growing adopters of agentic AI," referring to technology that can understand normal English instructions and perform tasks like creating documents or interacting with other software systems.
Controversial Reduction in Jury Trials
Alongside his AI expansion plans, Lammy reiterated his commitment to reducing the number of jury trials in England and Wales, citing the need to address court backlogs. He defended this approach by noting that "only 3% of criminal cases currently go before a jury," with the vast majority already heard fairly by magistrates without juries.
"It does not change the fundamental right to a fair trial, which remains absolute," Lammy asserted. "But there's no automatic right to a trial by jury." He estimated that following proposed changes, approximately three-quarters of trials in crown courts would still be heard by juries, including most serious youth cases.
Law Society Expresses Serious Concerns
The legal community has responded with caution to Lammy's announcements. Richard Atkinson, a solicitor and former head of the Law Society, warned that "AI is not a silver bullet to improve the justice system." While supporting modernization efforts, Atkinson emphasized that "all decisions, especially those with serious consequences to people's lives, must be made by humans."
Atkinson acknowledged that AI might help ease administrative pressures but stressed it should not replace necessary investment in court infrastructure and staffing. "Where liberty and reputation are at stake, the government must take particular care to safeguard people's rights and ensure fair processes," he cautioned.
Historical Precedents and Future Implications
Defending his proposed changes, Lammy referenced historical precedents in the justice system, including Margaret Thatcher's reforms regarding where certain cases were heard and the relatively recent creation of crown courts in the early 1970s. These references appear designed to contextualize his proposals as part of an ongoing evolution of judicial processes rather than radical departures from tradition.
The announcements come amid broader debates about technology's role in public services and concerns about AI reliability in critical decision-making contexts. As the Ministry of Justice moves forward with both AI expansion and jury trial reduction, legal experts and civil liberties advocates are likely to closely monitor implementation and outcomes.
