Legal aid reform should not simply be seen as an exercise in economics. Although legal aid policy is driven by the need to control costs and achieve value for money, there are also ways in which it is influenced by concepts of access to justice and arguments drawn from both ECHR and those elements of EU law that are similar. While legal aid provision remains thoroughly within the hands of the nation state, any sensible assessment must also take into account the influence of these bodies of law. A judge, Mr. Justice Darling, once said, 'the law courts of England are open to all men like the doors of the Ritz Hotel'. In other words, the courts are there for anyone to use, but cost may prevent many people from seeking justice. It is perhaps undeniable that under the doctrine of the Rule of Law, every person should be treated equally before the law, and that this means that everyone should have equal access to the law and to justice. Whether the old legal aid system achieved this has been the subject of endless debates and has indeed provided the basis and impetus for the Lord Chancellor, who is responsible for legal services, to come up with a White Paper entitled 'Modernizing Justice', which led to the passing of the Access to Justice Act (AJA) 1999. This Act replaced the framework for legal aid and established by its predecessor, the Legal Aid Act 1988. .
As a result of the coming into force of the AJA 1999, civil legal aid was largely replaced in April 2000. Similarly, criminal legal aid was also replaced in April 2001. Essentially, unlike the old system, the AJA 1999 provided for two new schemes. There is the Community Legal Service (CLS) which is responsible for civil matters, and the Criminal Defence Service (CDS) which is responsible for criminal matters. The Legal Services Commission (LSC) has supervisory jurisdiction over both the CLS and the CDS. These will now be examined in turn.