Are Crown Prosecution Service advocates any good?
The quality of the criminal justice system depends on its advocates — both to secure convictions and to avoid miscarriages of justice. But that quality is under scrutiny, as the Bar — once the monopoly supplier of Crown Court advocacy — loses increasing amounts of work to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on the prosecution side and to solicitors on the defence side. The CPS has embarked on a strategy to do more and more of its advocacy in-house — leading to criticism from the Bar over poor standards. Last year (2008-09), 22 per cent of its advocacy, measured by costs, was spent in-house, saving £11.5 million. This year (2009-10) the target is 25 per cent. At the same time a row erupted in April when a judge, Judge Gledhill, QC, criticised the performance of three of four solicitor higher-court advocates, alleging lack of experience and competence, and accusing the law firms of doing the work themselves for financial reasons.
