English Legal System
Introduction
The bedrock of the protection of human rights in any state is through access to justice. Access to justice enables citizens to exercise their different rights such as the right to a fair trial, the right to an effective remedy, and the right to equality before the law. For many years, the provision of legal aid in the United Kingdom has acted as the foundation for ensuring timely access to justice. Other than having access to justice, people also require legal support and advice which in most cases is costly. According to Amnesty International “Every day, ordinary people face legal problems where they need to be able to get the right advice and support as soon as possible…Without that advice and support the consequences can be profound”. These consequences include cuts in legal aid including homelessness, falling into debt, lack of support for child custody, and separation from their families among others. In this paper, the impact of the legal aid cuts brought into force by the introduction of the Legal Aid, Sentencing, and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 is discussed.
The Impact of the Legal Aid Cuts
Following the changes under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012, the legal aid does not fund the following areas like debt, education apart from special education, employment cases, immigration apart from asylum cases and detention, private family law except if there is any issue of child abuse or domestic violence, and welfare benefits apart from appeals. The severe cuts to civil legal aid part of the LASPO Act 2012 have consequences for the poorest, most in need of legal protection, and the most vulnerable people in England. For instance, without accessible and timely legal advice, persons cannot claim and enforce their rights effectively, and their issues could deteriorate and have intense consequences for people and their families. For example, children are inevitably disadvantaged by the change in legal aid because they cannot assert their legal rights with regard to matters that could have detrimental long-term consequences. Trafficked and separated children have been denied their rights of legal access because limited legal aid has reduced their access to immigration assistance and advice. Subsequently, human rights protections have been damaged in England.
Following the legal aid cuts, specialist legal advice has been lost in reference to early-stage problems because people are now required to access the needed assistance when the issue escalates. For instance, domestic violence related because requires trigger evidence that can show that they are victims of abuse. Under such circumstances, a lack of early legal advice to the affected person could result in escalating order of problems. For example, in R v Lord Chancellor and another [2015] EWHC 35 the key issue raised in the case related to whether domestic violence evidence gateway in LASPO 2012 and further discussions have shown that legal aid cuts have prevented a large women population from accessing legal aid. For women experiencing domestic violence to receive the necessary legal aid, a limit of 24 months is imposed. Before a victim gets legal aid, the person could be abused physically and financially. In addition, the rules under the eligibility for legal aid with reference to evidence of domestic violence are restrictive and narrow. Consequently, the victims cannot access justice effectively and have the necessary protection.
According to Alice Wyss a researcher of the Amnesty International UK, “Cuts to legal aid imposed by this Government have decimated access to justice and left thousands of the most vulnerable without essential legal advice and support”. Thus, the changes in cuts affected the most vulnerable people who cannot have access to courts including migrants and refugees, children and vulnerable young people, and persons with extra vulnerabilities. Children as well as vulnerable young people lack the capabilities to circumnavigate difficult legal processes alone, although that is what LASPO Act allows for. If parents cannot have required legal access and advice, this can negatively affect the ability of judicial and administrative persons to make proper and reasonable decisions. Thus, a two-tier civil justice system seems to have been open to people who can afford it, but gradually closed to disadvantaged persons and those in need of protection. For example, parents who are fighting to have an access to their separated children, people with mental health problems who are at threat of homelessness, and victims of domestic violence. A report by the Children’s Society has estimated that as a result of the legal aid cuts, more than 2,500 cases that involve children as claimants have no access to legal aid, in spite of their challenging immigration cases. Moreover, more than 9,300 and 12,400 migrants live under private foster care arrangements and they have been affected because they lack immigration advice and support.
The civil legal aid cuts have had a serious as well as a disproportionate impact on marginalised and disadvantaged people living in the UK. Based on the evidence gathered by Amnesty International established that most of the persons interviewed noted that they “felt left in the dark, isolated, under significant added stress, and in some cases as if they lacked a vital lifeline”. Thus, refugees and migrants have become more vulnerable under LASPO because they cannot access and navigate the legal system with ease. Issues such as mental health problems, language and culture barriers, literacy problems, isolation, homelessness, and destitution have also been experienced by those accessing legal aid in England.
Conclusion
The LASPO Act 2012 changes have affected different areas with some exceptions including debt, education, employment cases, immigration cases, private family law, and welfare benefits. The most affected individuals are the poor, vulnerable, and marginalised persons in the UK. The changes have affected the right to a fair trial, the right to an effective remedy, and the right to equality. The consequences related to a cut in legal aid include homelessness, lack of child custody, and separation from their families. As a result of the legal aid cuts, trafficked and separated children cannot exercise their rights of legal access to immigration assistance and advice. The LASPO requires persons to provide trigger evidence within the 24-month period, and a lack of early legal advice to the affected person could escalate the issue. The cut has also created a two-tier civil justice system that has a disproportionate impact on marginalised and disadvantaged people.
Bibliography
Cases
R v Lord Chancellor and another [2015] EWHC 35 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 154
Other Sources
Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, 10 October 2016) accessed 16 January 2016.
Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, October 2016) accessed 16 January 2016.
House of Commons Justice Committee, ‘Impact of changes to civil legal aid under Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012’, House of Commons Justice Committee, (12 March 2015) accessed 16 January 2016.
Law Society, ‘Legal aid changes: key information and advice’ (Law Society, 12 March 2013) accessed 16 January 2016.
Pinter, Ilona, ‘Cut Off From Justice-The Impact Of Excluding Separated Migrant Children From Legal Aid (The Children’s Society, 12 June 2015) accessed 16 January 2016.
[1] Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, October 2016) accessed 16 January 2016. P. 1.
[2] House of Commons Justice Committee, ‘Impact of changes to civil legal aid under Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012’, House of Commons Justice Committee, 12 March 2015) accessed 16 January 2016.
[3] Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, October 2016) P.70
[4] Law Society, ‘Legal aid changes: key information and advice’ (Law Society, 12 March 2013) accessed 16 January 2016.
[5] R v Lord Chancellor and another [2015] EWHC 35 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 154.
[6] R v Lord Chancellor and another [2015] EWHC 35 (Admin), [2015].
[7] Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, 10 October 2016) accessed 16 January 2016.
[8] Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International).
[9] Pinter, Ilona, ‘Cut Off From Justice-The Impact Of Excluding Separated Migrant Children From Legal Aid (The Children’s Society, 12 June 2015) accessed 16 January 2016. P.3
[10] Amnesty International UK, ‘Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice, (Amnesty International, October 2016) accessed 16 January 2016. P. 28
