[4][5] The government states that the procedure is designed to be an accessible, speedy, effective and more efficient means of delivering justice when dealing with the most minor summary offences,[6] but it has been criticised.
Those pleading guilty, or those who do not respond to the initial notice within 21 days, will have their cases dealt with by a single justice of the peace based on the submitted paperwork alone, without either the prosecutor or defendant being present in person.
[10] It sets out an approach to circulating lists of pending SJP cases, verdicts (results/register) and sentences, and makes clear that accredited journalists should be provided with the prosecution statement of facts and exhibits, and any defence representations in mitigation, subject to judicial restrictions that may prohibit it, in the same way as for any magistrates' court hearing.
Proposed improvements to the system as implemented as of 2024[update] include requiring all defendants' pleas and mitigations to be heard by prosecutors before the hearing, and elimination of the effect of time pressure on decisions.
[5] In 2024 Judge Goldspring, the Chief Magistrate for England & Wales ruled the use of SJOs by rail companies to be unlawful, saying "parliament did not envisage" train fare offences being prosecuted using SJPs.