Jess Phillips Calls Herself Victim of Courts Backlog as Jury Trial Bill Advances

Published: 11 March 2026 The English Chronicle Desk The English Chronicle Online – UK News

Labour MP Jess Phillips has revealed she is herself a “victim of the courts backlog,” as parliament voted to advance controversial legislation that would scrap some jury trials in England and Wales. The safeguarding minister said her own case involving a man accused of breaching a restraining order will not be heard until 2028, underscoring the scale of delays in the criminal justice system.

Speaking to the Guardian, Phillips said: “I am a victim of the backlog, and I know what it feels like to be a victim of crime. I see the court system used to control victims all the time. It is a tactic well known among those who study stalking, and it has to change.”

Her comments came on a day of emotive debate in the House of Commons, where MPs voted 304 to 203 in favour of the Courts and Tribunals Bill. The legislation, which passed its second reading, includes measures to abolish jury trials in certain cases, remove the automatic right of appeal from magistrates’ courts, and introduce a new criminal court structure.

Phillips’s intervention highlighted how delays can be weaponised by perpetrators. She described being “flabbergasted” when a man convicted of crimes against her was able to appeal in crown court, effectively controlling her ability to work. “This is a man who has wished me dead who gets to say ‘you can’t go to work today’,” she said.

Other MPs also shared personal experiences. Charlotte Nichols, Labour MP for Warrington North, disclosed she had been raped after attending a political event. She opposed the bill, accusing ministers of “weaponising victims” to push through reforms. “Experiences like mine feel like they’ve been used for rhetorical misdirection,” she told the Commons.

Natalie Fleet, Labour MP for Bolsover, who was groomed and raped, said victims’ voices were being lost in the debate. “You know what’s worse than being raped? Facing years of waiting to see if people believe you,” she said.

The vote exposed divisions within Labour. Ten MPs, including Richard Burgon, John McDonnell and Nadia Whittome, voted against the bill, while 90 abstained. Critics argued the reforms represent an “attack” on a fundamental principle of justice: the right to trial by jury.

Justice secretary David Lammy defended the measures, saying they were necessary to tackle a record backlog of nearly 80,000 criminal cases. Ministers argue that scrapping some jury trials will speed up justice, particularly for victims of rape, some of whom have waited five years for their cases to reach court.

But opponents, including barristers and campaigners, warn the changes could undermine fairness, especially for defendants from ethnic minorities. Thousands of lawyers have written to the prime minister, calling the proposals “unpopular, untested and poorly evidenced.”

Outside Westminster, the bill has faced fierce opposition. Jo Hamilton, one of the former post office operators wrongly convicted in the Horizon IT scandal, told Labour leader Keir Starmer that limiting jury trials would “further erode trust in the establishment.”

Nick Timothy, the shadow justice secretary, said Lammy had “struck the first blow against our ancient legal right to trial by jury.” The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Reform and the Greens all opposed the bill.

Despite the controversy, a group of 40 female Labour MPs, including former equalities minister Anneliese Dodds, wrote to Lammy urging him to remain steadfast. They argued that the waits victims of gender‑related crimes face are intolerable and require urgent reform.

The bill will now move to committee stage, where MPs are expected to push for amendments. It will be scrutinised line by line, with campaigners hoping to preserve jury trials in more cases and introduce specialist courts for rape and sexual assault.

Phillips, however, insists the reforms are necessary. “It’s OK for me. I’ve got extra security, I’ve got other safeguards,” she said. “But imagine that was a breach of an order against a violent ex‑husband, and it’s going to be heard in more than two years’ time. Are you joking? That’s absolutely mental.”

Her remarks underline the human cost of the backlog. For victims, delays are not just administrative—they can prolong trauma and allow perpetrators to exert control.

The passage of the Courts and Tribunals Bill marks a pivotal moment in the debate over justice reform. Supporters argue it is essential to tackle delays and deliver faster justice. Critics warn it risks undermining fundamental rights and could create new injustices.

For Jess Phillips, the issue is deeply personal. As both a minister and a victim, she embodies the tension at the heart of the debate: how to balance efficiency with fairness, and how to ensure victims are not further harmed by the very system meant to protect them.

Read More At>>