*/
Barristers, including QCs, will be required to undergo a compulsory re-accreditation process every five years under proposals for a new criminal advocacy assurance scheme that is due to begin next July.
In its consultation paper, launched in August, the Joint Advocacy Group (“JAG”) said it was “important for the credibility of the scheme for QCs to be involved.
“The award of a mark of excellence by an independent body is separate from a regulatory quality assurance scheme which is assessing threshold standards”.
The scheme will apply to all criminal advocates, including legal executives, and is the joint initiative of the Bar Standards Board, Solicitors Regulation Authority and Ilex Professional Standards.
Advocates will be assigned one of four levels. Level one covers advocacy in the magistrates’ court, level two applies to the higher courts, level three covers complex advocacy in the Crown Court and level four covers the most complex Crown Court cases and appeals.
Assessment at the two highest levels will “need to be particularly robust” and will require judicial evaluation, JAG said.
The scheme includes a “traffic lights” system of warnings and concerns, under which judges can identify poor performing advocates and recommend them for further training.
Judges of Circuit judge level and above will be expected to take part. JAG acknowledges that judges have “historically” been “reluctant to identify” poor advocacy, and suggests a “programme of education and publicity coupled with senior judicial direction” can counter this.
While judges have been “largely non-interventionist”, JAG points out that they have reported “feeling increasingly constrained and frustrated at their inability to deal with advocacy standards”.
Advocates will be given three years from the start of the scheme to complete their re-accreditation process, and should “self-assess” in the meantime to decide on the level at which they currently practise.
Barristers have until 12 November 2010 to respond to the consultation.
In its consultation paper, launched in August, the Joint Advocacy Group (“JAG”) said it was “important for the credibility of the scheme for QCs to be involved.
“The award of a mark of excellence by an independent body is separate from a regulatory quality assurance scheme which is assessing threshold standards”.
The scheme will apply to all criminal advocates, including legal executives, and is the joint initiative of the Bar Standards Board, Solicitors Regulation Authority and Ilex Professional Standards.
Advocates will be assigned one of four levels. Level one covers advocacy in the magistrates’ court, level two applies to the higher courts, level three covers complex advocacy in the Crown Court and level four covers the most complex Crown Court cases and appeals.
Assessment at the two highest levels will “need to be particularly robust” and will require judicial evaluation, JAG said.
The scheme includes a “traffic lights” system of warnings and concerns, under which judges can identify poor performing advocates and recommend them for further training.
Judges of Circuit judge level and above will be expected to take part. JAG acknowledges that judges have “historically” been “reluctant to identify” poor advocacy, and suggests a “programme of education and publicity coupled with senior judicial direction” can counter this.
While judges have been “largely non-interventionist”, JAG points out that they have reported “feeling increasingly constrained and frustrated at their inability to deal with advocacy standards”.
Advocates will be given three years from the start of the scheme to complete their re-accreditation process, and should “self-assess” in the meantime to decide on the level at which they currently practise.
Barristers have until 12 November 2010 to respond to the consultation.
Barristers, including QCs, will be required to undergo a compulsory re-accreditation process every five years under proposals for a new criminal advocacy assurance scheme that is due to begin next July.
The Bar Council faces both opportunities and challenges on our key areas this year
Exclusive Q&A with Henry Dannell
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs discusses the benefits of Non-invasive Prenatal Paternity testing for the timely resolution of family disputes
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Have you considered being a barrister in the British Army? Here’s an insight into a career in Army Legal Services
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the role that drug, alcohol and DNA testing can play in non-court dispute resolution (NCDR)
As the international community strives towards a more inclusive future, ongoing dialogue and reform will be essential to harmonise the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities with the complex realities of disability, says Christina Warner
‘Hard work and commitment can open doors. I believe that I am proof of that,’ says Senior Treasury Counsel Louise Oakley. She tells Anthony Inglese CB about her journey from Wolverhampton to the Old Bailey
What's it like being a legal trainee at the Crown Prosecution Service? Amy describes what drew her to the role, the skills required and a typical day in the life
Barbara Mills KC wants to raise the profile of the family Bar. She also wants to improve wellbeing and enhance equality, diversity and inclusion in the profession. She talks to Joshua Rozenberg KC (hon) about her plans for the year ahead
The winning essay is ‘A fiction of defendant participation: Single Justice Procedure offences should be moved to the civil jurisdiction’ by Hal McNulty