Judges and magistrates will be given greater discretion in imposing financial penalties, Michael Gove has promised, after he scrapped the mandatory criminal courts charge.



The justice secretary’s abrupt U-turn – in response to the protest resignations of more than 100 magistrates – ditches a money-raising scheme introduced by his predecessor Chris Grayling, which only came into force in April this year.

The move is part of a broader Ministry of Justice review of courtroom fines designed to produce “a more effective tool” to deliver improved non-custodial sentences.

Gove announced he was doing away with the charge in an address to the annual meeting of the Magistrates Association in central London. “The basic principle behind the policy – that those who have broken the law should bear some of the costs of running the criminal courts – is right,” Gove said. “However, as the justice select committee set out in its recent report, there have been concerns raised about how this has worked in practice.”



He continued: “It was introduced for the best of reasons: to ensure that those who impose costs on the criminal justice system make a contribution to those costs wherever possible.

“If you’ve deliberately broken the law, if the taxpayer has to shell out to ensure justice is done, and if you have the means, then there can clearly be a case for the court imposing a financial penalty.

“But it has become clear that while the intention behind the policy was honourable, in reality that intent has fallen short. Whenever I have had the opportunity to talk to magistrates over the last six months, the criminal courts charge has been raised and in almost every case it has been criticised … I would like to give the judiciary – including, of course, the magistracy – greater discretion in setting financial orders.”

Critics said the criminal courts charge – ranging from £150 up to £1,200 – was unlikely to be collected in many cases and created a perverse incentive for the innocent to plead guilty.

Malcolm Richardson, the Magistrates Association national chairman, said: “This is fantastic news and we’re very grateful to Mr Gove for listening to the case made by magistrates about the charge. In all my years on the bench, I’ve never seen something strike so hard at the heart of justice.

“Although we have lost many experienced magistrates, there will be an enormous sense of relief across the criminal justice system. We’re grateful that Mr Gove made this announcement to the MA, as it stands in testimony to his collaborative approach and his appreciation of the work of magistrates.”

Michael Gove rebuked for phoning prospective prison inspectors Read more

Gove had given broad hints that he intended to do away with the highly unpopular measure, which even the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas, had condemned as putting access to justice beyond the reach of most people and “imperilling a core principle of Magna Carta”.

Gove’s overturning of Grayling’s initiative is the latest in a series of policy reversals. The former justice secretary’s plan for a secure college for young offenders, a ban on books for prisoners, outsourcing the enforcement of court fines and a prisons training contract with Saudi Arabia have all been scrapped.

Imposition of the criminal courts charge is due to end on Christmas Eve. The mandatory charge was levied on any defendant who pleaded guilty or was convicted, on top of the victims’ surcharge, prosecution costs and fines. It started at £150 for those admitting guilt at magistrates court, rising to £1,200 for those found guilty at crown court – creating a financial disincentive to risk the uncertainty of a jury trial.



The swift decision implies that early returns from the criminal courts charge did not deliver the anticipated income of up to £135m a year that Grayling’s officials initially promised.



We don’t need new prisons, we need a new prison culture | Erwin James Read more

Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, which campaigned against the charge, said: “We welcome this decision and applaud the secretary of state for acting quickly to get rid of a charge that was simply unfair. This is a victory for justice. It augurs well for changes being made to the courts and penal systems, which both need radical reform.

“There remains the problem of people who have had the criminal courts charge imposed on them, many of whom will simply not be able to pay. We call on magistrates to exercise compassion and common sense when these unfortunate people are returned to court.”

Bob Neill MP, the Conservative chair of parliament’s justice select committee, said: “This is the recommendation the justice committee made in our recent report. We arrived at that view on the basis of the overwhelming evidence we received about problems with the way the charge has been working, and it is good that the secretary of state is willing to respond so swiftly to take account of the inquiry we carried out and the evidence submitted to us.”

Phil Bowen, director of the Centre for Justice Innovation, who gave evidence to the justice select committee said: “This is great news. The criminal court charge had worrying implications for fairness and perceptions of justice in our courts. Imposing a financial incentive for a guilty plea had the hallmarks of US plea-bargaining. Thankfully, the MPs on the justice select committee understood this attacked a core principle of justice. And now Mr Gove has shown he too understands the risk it posed.”

Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, the incoming chair of the Bar Council, said: “The charge created a perverse incentive to plead guilty, negated the principle of judicial discretion, reduced compensation awards and was never likely to raise the funds anticipated.”

Bella Sankey, director of policy for Liberty, said: “When the criminal courts charge was proposed, the miscarriages of justice which would follow were plain to see. This perverse measure was a blight on our criminal justice system’s proud reputation for fairness and integrity. We are delighted the government has now recognised that fact.”

Ben Summerskill, director of the Criminal Justice Alliance, said: “We’re delighted at the government’s decision. Introducing a charge which created an incentive to plead guilty to a crime someone hadn’t committed wasn’t justice, it was nonsense on stilts.”