Head of legal hits out at impact of court closure plan on council and community

The Head of Legal Services at Dartford Borough Council has sharply criticised Ministry of Justice plans to close the local Magistrates’ Court.

The Ministry has proposed removing the service 20 miles away to Medway (30-40 minutes’ travel time by road), as part of a wider shake-up that has earmarked 91 courts in England and Wales for closure.

In a response to the MoJ consultation on the plans, Marie Kelly-Stone said that, apart from the County Court which opens for restricted hours in the summer period, the inhabitants of Dartford would be denied access to local justice. “In short, access to criminal justice and associated administrative matters such as licensing applications, will be denied on a local basis.”

Kelly-Stone said there was “a general feeling of dismay” about the closure plans among the various council departments who used the Magistrates’ Court.

All were unanimous that such a closure should be resisted, she said. This was for the following reasons:

• There would be additional travel, cost and inconvenience for legal practitioners, victims of crime, defendants and witnesses. If travelling by car, parking in Medway near the Magistrates’ Court could be a problem. Travel costs would increase (“a recent case required three court appearances”);
• Witnesses were most likely to be based in the town closest to the parties to a case – witnesses faced the prospect of having to travel further to give evidence – the process of which often only took ten or twenty minutes. “The disproportionate travel time and cost is therefore likely to result in greater non-attendance. This cannot be an efficient use of time. If the priority is to reduce inefficiency in the court system, then the priority should be to tackle non-attendance in court. The problem of non-attendance can only be made worse by increasing the inconvenience for witnesses who are called to give evidence”;
• The non-attendance of defendants due to the problems associated with the journey – “this will of course have a knock on effect on police time, as more warrants for arrests will have to be sought, due to non-attendance of defendants”;
• The inadequacy of public transport links, problems of onward connections and the risks to different parties of having to share public transport as well as the environmental impact of additional travel, the impact of inclement weather on travel arrangements and the potential need for overnight accommodation.

Kelly-Stone added that, on a wider issue, the council was concerned about the detrimental impact the closure and relocation would have on its community:

• A number of court users would be adversely affected by the closure and deprived of an ability to access local justice (“19% of households in the borough do not have access to a car and so have to rely on public transport – many of these households will be amongst the most vulnerable in the area (low income households, the elderly or people with disabilities)”);
• The potential for a reduced level of local participation and visibility with the potential consequence of loss of local knowledge – “justice should be seen to be done within the community and justice delivered and reported locally”;
• The potential for increased court delays through lack of capacity at Medway/Chatham to comfortably accommodate the business in the receiving courts.

Kelly-Stone continued: “The council is also concerned that other reforms such as the reduction in Legal Aid and the recent increases in court fees cumulatively, could have the effect of reducing access to justice. Such moves may, in the long term, if not carefully monitored, ultimately undermine the concept of rule of law in this country, as ever-increasing numbers are denied the opportunity of seeking justice due to financial restraints and travel difficulties.

“It is ironic that such moves should take place in the year when the country is celebrating the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, the spirit of which greatly favoured accessible justice for all.”

At the end of the response, which was endorsed last week by the council’s Cabinet, Dartford’s Head of Legal urged the MoJ to retain and enhance Dartford Magistrates’ Court.

The letter comes just weeks after the Leader of Bridgend County Borough Council urged the MoJ to re-think proposals to close its local court, amid concerns over access and the potential for increased costs for the authority’s legal team.

The MoJ consultation runs until 8 October. Details can be found here.