tom newrick

Criminal Bar Association Survey of Rape And Serious Sexual Offences •64% of Prosecutors completing our survey said at renewal they will not be reapplying to be on the RASSO List.  Only 246 RASSO Prosecutors who completed the survey said they would remain on the List in the future. •66% of Defence RASSO Counsel said they no longer want to conduct these cases. •53% of those who conduct Section 28 cross-examination do not want to carry on, with over half of those saying this was down to lack of remuneration for the work involved. •Overall 6 out of 10 surveyed cited poor fees as the reason for refusing to conduct RASSO cases. •Half of all those surveyed pointed to poor well-being as the cause for refusing to conduct RASSO cases. Current and future intentions: •Two thirds of all respondents (67%) said they will not currently consider accepting more RASSO cases. •Over three quarters (78%) of respondents under 5 years Call said they will not consider building a RASSO practice. •One third (34%) of respondents said they had reduced their RASSO practice in this past year. •46% of respondents cite the reason for reducing RASSO work as insufficient remuneration, 46% diary complications, 42% listing difficulties, 32% wellbeing. Prosecution barristers: •Two thirds of Prosecution Counsel (64%) said that they will not reapply to the CPS panel of approved RASSO prosecutors when their renewal is due – that includes those who are currently on CPS panel lists or who have previously prosecuted for the CPS. •Only one third (36%) currently on the CPS RASSO panel said they would re-apply. •Only 246 criminal barristers who are currently approved to prosecute on behalf the CPS said that they will make themselves available for CPS panel lists to prosecute RASSO cases. •Nearly two thirds (62%) of those who prosecute cited insufficient remuneration, 50% also cited wellbeing as affecting their decision not to reapply to prosecute RASSO cases. Defence barristers: •Over 4 in 10 (42%) of those who take on publicly funded RASSO defence cases do not intend continue to do so. [Pay is set by Government under Criminal Legal Aid Advocacy fees, AGFS] •Over half (52%) cited insufficient remuneration as a reason for this, 36% wellbeing, 30% listing difficulties. Fees for RASSO cases must be increased, to respect the complexities of evidence handling and to recognise their inherent seriousness if we are to retain and recruit the specialist Counsel needed.  We have submitted an urgent request for increased RASSO fees to the CLAARB but the MoJ must act quickly. We at the CBA will do our part to provide new RASSO training and with the support of the Bar Council and other stakeholders will help re-set the Criminal Justice System for victims, complainants and defendants.  Providing a visible swift justice system that people can trust must start with reducing the backlog which is a goal that can only be achieved by properly remunerating those dedicating themselves to it.