Legal Aid
our system expects. Fortunately, despite losing their entitlement to legal aid funding, many defendants and plaintiffs, prior to 2013, have been fortunate enough to be offered a small glimmer of hope in the form of a ‘Defendant’s Cost Orde r’, or DCO, which entitles them to state paid full compensation for the cost of expenses incurred to them during proceedings if they happen to be acquitted. However, unfortunately, following the LASPO act, as of October 1st 2012, private-paying defendants charged, and acquitted, in criminal proceedings, are no longer able to recover their financial losses. This means that, if one were to choose the rational option of paying for a competent lawyer, one potentially faces the fallout of financial destitution known as ‘the innocence tax’. This has thus encouraged defendants to either take a gamble on representing themselves in court in order to avoid enormous legal bills, or, in the ultimate miscarriage of justice, either drop the case they were rightfully fighting, or plead guilty when they are in fact innocent. Where a man wrongly accused of an offence of criminal damage paid more to be acquitted than he would have had he pleaded guilty, it is no surprise that a pandemic of ‘false confessions’ has been borne out of stricter legal aid legislation. That innocent citizens are forced to mortgage their homes due to hiring a competent lawyer in order to ensure justice is done, or otherwise drop charges or wrongfully plead guilty in order to avoid such costs is an extreme travesty, and is the direct result of legal aid reforms which have made any alternative simply financially inviable. One cannot avoid or neglect the harsh reality that drastic cuts in legal aid spending have led to miscarriages of justice, whether they occur as a result of defendants being forced out of pocket by hiring private defence which they cannot truly afford, or by feeling the need to either defend themselves, or plead guilty for a crime they did not truly commit. Where, according to ‘The Secret Barrister’, 17 on March 19th 2014, the government decided that a 1p cut to duty on lager, and a removal of duty on cider and spirits, which cost the taxpayer £300 million in that same year, was necessary, it became overtly apparent that the service of justice was of no interest to them, for the cuts to the legal system in that same year amounted to £220 million. To address fundamental issues in its legal system, the government must prioritize ensuring legal aid is accessible to all those who justly deserve it.
References
1. The National Archives. Human Rights Act 1998. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/5 13/08/2020 2. CC Griffiths. THE PRISONERS ’ COUNSEL ACT 1836:DOCTRINE, ADVOCACY AND THE CRIMINAL TRIAL. http://www.lawcrimehistory.org/journal/vol,4%20issue2%202014/Griffiths%20The%20Prisoners%20Co unsel%20Act%201836%20final.pdf. 14/08/2020 3. Wikipedia. Legal Aid and Advice Act 1949. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_Aid_and_Advice_Act_1949#cite_note-1 . 13/08.2020 4. Chambers student. Legal aid cuts and reforms. https://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to- start/newsletter/legal-aid-cuts-and-reforms. 12/08.2020 5. Chambers student. Legal aid cuts and reforms. https://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to- start/newsletter/legal-aid-cuts-and-reforms. 12/08.2020 6. Collins Dictionary. Civil Law . https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/civil-law . 15/08/2020 7. Amnesty International . Cuts to Civil Legal Aid. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/files/aiuk_legal_aid_report.pdf . 16/08/2020 8. Amnesty International . Cuts to Civil Legal Aid. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/files/aiuk_legal_aid_report.pdf . 16/08/2020 9. Gov.UK . Legal Services Commission. https://www.gov.uk/government/organizations/legal-services- commission . 12/08/2020 10. (Anonymous author). The Secret Barrister. 2018. London.
142
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software