Abstract

This project had the aim of investigating the extent to which the public had sufficient access to the UK justice system. It did so by examining four mechanisms through which the public are able to partake in or understand the justice system. These themes were the jury system and open justice, which facilitate public involvement, and the role of the media and legal language, which regard public comprehension. I decided to undertake this research to draw attention to the fact that access to justice transcends legal aid, which is what the term traditionally refers to. I found this to be a highly restrictive definition and sought to discuss other ways in which the justice system enables or obstructs access for the public. By combining an extended project with law, which is an area of interest for me, I wished to refine my academic and critical skills; by the end of this project, I have certainly done so. This project utilised official government documents and guidelines to form the basis of how each mechanism works and the restrictions which they are subject to. It then assessed discourse surrounding them from both experts and professionals, as well as the views of the layperson and citizens from other fields; in some instances, case studies were reviewed to examine a principle’s successes and failures in action. I also balanced the feasibility of enhancing access through each mechanism by considering the risks it presents to judicial integrity and the core principles of justice. Following this assessment, I was able to conclude that the public has an acceptable degree of access to the UK justice system; however, the system could benefit from greater promotion of the public’s rights under principle of open justice, more public legal education initiatives to encourage enthusiastic participation in jury duty, and streamlining in legal language to enhance comprehension.