The Government’s decision to transform the Department for Constitutional Affairs into a Ministry of Justice with additional responsibility for criminal justice and prisons provided a perfect opportunity for a sustained bout of lawyer-bashing.
Critics, among them former Home Secretary Charles Clarke, characterised the new department as The Ministry of Lawyers, as if this was proof in itself that it was a crazy idea. A BBC news correspondent quoted a minister complaining that the Government was creating one ministry to put people in prison and another, staffed by lawyers, to let them out again. Typically for this Government, a justice reform that a great many sensible people have been advocating for years has finally seen the light of day in a manner that suggests it was hastily written on the back of an envelope by a Prime Minister seeking to create a lasting legacy.
The timetable for such a major administrative reform seems almost recklessly tight — a recipe, one might imagine, for even more cock-ups than have currently been taking place at the Home Office. And that is saying something. In his statement, Blair boasted the move would create a seamless justice system. There was certainly an inherent conflict in the Home Office’s role both as champion of the police and the justice system. It explains why successive Home Secretaries have been at loggerheads with senior judges, who they have derided as liberal do-gooders, intent on applying the letter of law to the detriment of society at large. In theory at least, a powerful justice ministry could become an articulate champion of the desirability of ‘the rule of law’ while also fostering a more coherent approach to criminal justice that, for example, recognises the money criminal lawyers save by preventing people from going to prison unnecessarily. But don’t bet on it.
Given the option of building more prison cells, or diverting money towards measures that may actually help stabilise, or even reduce the prison population, it would be a brave justice minister who risked the wrath of The Daily Mail by taking the latter option. As well as presenting the opposition with an open goal (see shadow Solicitor General Jonathan Djanogly’s blog on legalweek.com), the way in which this major reform has been announced has clearly put the wind up the judiciary. The support that the senior judges have given to the proposals is about as qualified as you can possibly get. While ostensibly backing the move, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, warns of the danger of “recurrent crises” at the new ministry if the proposals are rushed through without either legislation or public debate.
But, of course, this is precisely what is going to happen.