Legal aid cuts will lead to more miscarriages of justice, top judges warn Link to video: Filling the gap: the rise of pro bono justice The most senior judges in England and Wales have criticised the government's legal aid reforms, warning of more miscarriages of justice as talented lawyers abandon criminal and publicly funded cases. The Judicial Executive Board - which includes the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, the master of the rolls, Lord Dyson, and the heads of the main divisions of the high court - released its detailed critique of the proposals on Thursday. The document is its formal response to the Ministry of Justice's consultation, Transforming Legal Aid, which aims to save the department £220m a year. In the face of overwhelming disapproval from the legal profession, the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, has already dropped one of the most controversial elements - depriving defendants of the ability to choose their own solicitor. In their submission, the judges acknowledge that "given the financial imperatives, some of the proposals in the consultation paper are necessary" but go on to warn about the likely consequences of reform. "Many lawyers have already ceased to act in legal aid cases," they note. Many of those entering either branch of the legal profession seek to avoid publicly funded areas if their ability and promise permit them the choice. They continue: "Some of the proposed changes are likely to transfer rather than save costs. It cannot be emphasised too strongly that good advocacy reduces cost ... Poor advocacy is wasteful of resources; cases are less well prepared and they occupy more court time and take longer to come to a conclusion, while simultaneously increasing the risk of mistakes and miscarriages of justice. Many young and talented lawyers are no longer choosing to practise in crime. Some who feel trapped in this area of practice may continue because they have no option. If the more talented lawyers do not work in crime, the impact will be not only on the quality of the defence, but also on the quality of the prosecution, many of whom are drawn from the same pool. In civil cases, the judges say, the withdrawal of legal aid will result in more litigants in person, claimants who are unrepresented. Such cases, they add, lead to more lengthy hearings and delays.