*/
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.
A decade of cuts and the brutal pandemic have left courts and barristers struggling to cope – a bid for justice spending
Philip N Bristow explains how to unlock your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step
With the property market witnessing significant changes since the beginning of the pandemic, Fleet Street Wealth’s Managing Director Julian Morgan considers the future of the home, the second home and the office
In partnership with the Bar Council, LexisNexis is offering up to 60% off its extensive webinar offering.
Chambers is expanding its team.
Making a move from the Bar to a career in governance: Maria Brookes outlines three good reasons to switch and how to do it
The family law system is in crisis and a failure to recognise it as such demeans the Herculean efforts of all involved, writes Celestine Greenwood, an exhausted family practitioner
Should we cap numbers coming to the Bar? Or help them make data driven decisions? asks IshanKolhatkar
Time to look afresh at the imposter syndrome narrative? Why pathologizing normal anxieties can be unhelpful to barristers and future generations. By Kate Brunner QC and Sarah Regan
Shifting the taboo, two silks talk about the menopause, its impact on women at the Bar and the need for a profession-wide rethink. By Lyndsey de Mestre QC and Brie Stevens-Hoare QC
Other sectors have support staff in place for senior professionals, so why not the Bar? An established barrister/VA team and their matchmaker explain how they make it work
