Alan Miller has launched a scathing attack on proposed modifications to jury trials in Britain, describing the plans as a major regression for the nation.
Speaking to GB News, the co-founder of the Together Declaration characterised the potential changes as "an enormous step backwards. A historic one, a legal one and a moral one".
The campaigner expressed deep alarm at proposals that could see a significant reduction in cases heard before citizen juries, warning that such reforms threaten fundamental principles that have underpinned British justice for centuries.
Mr Miller's intervention comes amid growing debate about court backlogs and the future of the legal system, with critics arguing that removing jury trials from complex cases would undermine a cornerstone of democratic accountability.
TRENDING
Stories
Videos
Your Say
The right to trial by jury was established in England during the 17th century, following the imprisonment of jurors who defied judicial pressure.
Mr Miller argued this principle has since become a model adopted across the globe.
"We're the envy of the world with it, still one of the few things we still are, in the Commonwealth and elsewhere," he stated, contrasting Britain's system with nations such as China where such rights do not exist.
Mr Miller raised concerns that magistrates, whom he described as predominantly professionals rather than ordinary working people, cannot match the comprehensive deliberations of a jury.
Alan Miller has hit out at the Government's plans to push ahead with scrapping jury trials
|PA / GB NEWS
He suggested that investigations conducted by judges alone have been shown to lack the thoroughness achieved when twelve citizens examine evidence together.
Rather than reducing jury trials, Miller proposed practical alternatives to address court delays.
He noted that many judges currently retire at 70 and suggested their service could be extended to ease capacity pressures. Accelerating procedures following arrests was another solution he advocated.
Mr Miller warned that eliminating half of jury trials on grounds of length and complexity could create dangerous precedents.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
Sir Keir Starmer is fully backing Mr Lammy on his plans | PA"We should not allow a situation where this kind of tyrannical situation could arise, because it's not also just about this Government, which people have a lot of concerns about, but anyone else in the future, too," he cautioned.
He linked his concerns to broader anxieties about state overreach, referencing worries about two-tier policing and individuals being imprisoned for social media posts.
Mr Miller contended that a panel of twelve citizens drawn from diverse backgrounds provides a far more representative cross-section of society than any single judicial figure.
"It's much more likely to have a situation where a magistrate or a judge has very particular views about certain circumstances and situations," he argued.
Mr Miller told GB News that the move could 'profoundly damage Britain'
|GB NEWS
He maintained that juries encompass a broader demographic range, incorporating different age groups and perspectives, whereas individual judges may be influenced by personal biases.
Mr Miller also accused those behind the proposals of showing "disregard and a contempt for the public and our citizens," insisting that ordinary people possess the capacity to set aside political opinions and weigh evidence fairly.
He noted that concern about the reforms extends across party lines, with Labour backbenchers among those recognising the changes could cause irreversible harm to Britain.
He concluded: "There's a recognition across the board that this could profoundly damage Britain in a way that's irrevocable.
"And we should not allow a situation where this kind of tyrannical situation could arise, because it's not also just about this Government, which people have a lot of concerns about, but anyone else in the future, too."