Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Defence on the effectiveness of introducing a statutory duty of candour on the military.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Bill will apply to all public authorities, including the military.
Appropriate safeguards for sensitive information will be in place and we are clear that nothing should undermine our national security.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many charges were laid under Prison rule 51 relating specifically to aggravation towards a protected characteristic of (a) race, (b) religion and (c) belief in the last year where data exists; and how many of those charges were proven.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Prison Rule 51 sets out the offences of which an adult prisoner can be found guilty, including those which relate to aggravation towards a protected characteristic. The information on the breakdown of which protected characteristics these offences against discipline relate to can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Data on Adjudication outcomes related to these offences can be found in the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK, which are published quarterly.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which faith-based (a) charities and (b) organisations are permitted to visit prisons.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Ministry of Justice recognises the vital contribution that charities and wider third sector organisations make to supporting prisoner rehabilitation.
Decisions as to which individuals or organisations may enter, or work in, a prison are taken by the prison governor. These decisions take account of the proposed role, security requirements, and other operational factors.
The Ministry of Justice does not maintain a central database of every organisation contributing to the work of prisons in England and Wales, as there is no operational need to do so.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many illegal marriages have been recorded in each year since 2010, broken down by local authority area.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice does not hold this data.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of introducing a statutory duty of candour on (a) military intelligence and (b) Special Forces.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Bill will apply to all public authorities, including military intelligence and the Special Forces.
We have worked closely with representatives across Government on the policy in this Bill – including the impact that a duty of candour would have on military intelligence and Special Forces.
We are clear that the duty of candour applies to all public authorities, including intelligence services, however, the duty of candour and processes for disclosure may need to apply in a different way to ensure that secure information is handled correctly.
We are clear that nothing should undermine our national security.
We are continuing to work closely across government with families, stakeholders and the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee to bring forward amendments that meet those aims. We will update the House in due course.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what representations he has received from counterparts in Five Eyes countries that do not have a statutory duty of candour.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The sovereign capabilities of our security and intelligence agencies, underpinned by appropriate safeguards and oversight, enable us to keep ahead of our adversaries and provide the lynchpin for our collaboration with our Five Eyes partners.
We work incredibly closely with our allies, particularly our Five Eyes partners, to ensure our collective national security.
We are clear that the duty of candour must not undermine national security.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many Sharia law courts have operated in the UK in each year since 2010 and broken down by local authority area.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
There are no sharia law courts.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which (a) professional bodies and (b) legal organisations his Department consulted prior to the publication of proposals to restrict jury trials; and what alternative measures his Department has considered to reduce the Crown Court backlog.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
In developing his recommendations, Sir Brian Leveson and his expert advisers, including Professor David Ormerod, engaged with many external bodies and organisations with invaluable expertise of our Criminal Justice System including criminal legal organisations, charities, academics, and members of the judiciary. A full list is at Annex C of Part 1 of his report.
When considering Sir Brian’s recommendations and developing our proposals, I have engaged regularly with stakeholders and relevant sectors including but not limited to representatives from the legal sector (Law Society, Bar Council, Criminal Bar Association), victims and victims representatives (the Victims Commissioner, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner, Rape Crisis), judiciary (Circuit leaders, Judicial leadership), magistracy (Magistrates’ Association, Magistrates’ Leadership Executive), non-governmental organisations (Appeal, JUSTICE, Transform Justice), court staff in criminal courts around the country (Wood Green, Snaresbrook, Kingston, Southwark, Telford, Birmingham etc) and similar international jurisdictions. For example, I met judges and visited courts in Canada, which uses types of judge-only trial.
We welcome the recommendations made in Part 1 of Sir Brian’s Review, which provided the blueprint for reform. Sir Brian’s recommendations were ambitious, but he also recognised that the Government might need to take his recommendations further to address the scale of the challenge we are facing. We have three levers for restoring stability and confidence in the criminal courts system – investment, modernisation, and structural reform. Pursuing any one of these levers in isolation would not be enough to meet projected demand into the courts, let alone address the rising caseload. The Government has already invested heavily in the system – in record sitting days, court buildings and technology, and in legal professionals. On 4 February 2026, Sir Brian published Part 2 of his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, which makes recommendations to improve the efficiency of the criminal courts. We will urgently consider the proposals set out, alongside Sir Brian’s remaining recommendations from Part 1, and respond to them in due course.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of trends in the number of court sitting days on the Crown Court backlog.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
We have funded 112,250 Crown Court sitting days this financial year – 5,000 more than the previous Government and a record number. The Deputy Prime Minister has made clear that sitting days will continue to increase in both the Crown and magistrates’ courts.
As our latest published projections show, demand by 2030 is forecast to be 7% higher in the Crown Court than current levels. This means the courts would need to sit 139,000 days just to keep up with demand and even that would not enable us to reduce the backlog. The system is not able to deliver that number – there are insufficient prosecutors, defence barristers and judges to keep up with the demand. As a benchmark, the Lady Chief Justice has said that the maximum the judiciary could presently sit is around 113,000 sitting days.
Therefore, even with record-breaking investment in sitting days, the Crown Court backlog will continue to grow, leaving people waiting for longer and longer for justice. That is why we are pulling every lever we have – investment, reform and efficiency – to turn the tide on the backlog and begin to deliver justice for victims.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of requiring organisations to contribute to legal fees when (a) an unfair dismissal and (b) a discriminatory employment practice has occurred.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Organisations can already be asked to contribute to the cost of legal fees where vexatious or unreasonable behaviour has occurred. The Employment Tribunals (ET) can issue cost orders where one side is ordered to pay the other’s legal costs. For unfair dismissal cases, if the tribunal decides a claimant has been unfairly dismissed, they can receive compensation. Compensation awards can be ‘basic’ (based on age, length of service and average weekly wage) and ‘compensatory’ (based on loss of earnings).
The Ministry of Justice has not carried out an assessment of the merits of introducing more widespread use of cost orders. This is because the Tribunal Procedure Committee (TPC) is responsible for making procedure rules in the ET that includes the rules regarding cost orders. The Lord Chancellor can consider impacts of the changes the TPC recommend before deciding whether to implement them.