header-logo header-logo

Last stop for wrongful convictions ‘needs improving’

10 March 2021
Issue: 7924 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Rule of law
printer mail-detail
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which refers potential miscarriages of justice to the Court of Appeal, is underfunded and ‘too deferential’, MPs have said.

The Westminster Commission on Miscarriages of Justice made 30 recommendations in its report In the interests of justice, published last week. The Westminster Commission was set up two years ago to investigate concerns about the low, and recently declining, number of cases referred to the Court of Appeal.

MPs heard evidence that the CCRC received less than £6m in funding in 2019–20, compared to more than £9m in 2004. The organisation was short-staffed, with only 31 of the 45 case review managers it needed.

The report calls for an end to the ‘real possibility’ test, where referrals take place only where the CCRC considers there is a ‘real possibility’ the conviction or sentence will be overturned.

The report considers that the predictive nature of this test has encouraged the CCRC to be ‘too deferential’ to the Court of Appeal, and that the test ‘acts as a brake on the CCRC’s freedom of decision’. Instead, it wants a more objective test—for example, that a case is to be referred if the CCRC considers the conviction unsafe, that the sentence may be manifestly excessive or wrong in law, or that a referral is in the interests of justice. It suggests this would ‘encourage a different and more independent mindset in the CCRC’.

The MPs call for more funding, publicly funded representation and reforms that will allow the CCRC to get evidence from public bodies more quickly.

Lord Garnier QC, the Westminster Commission’s co-chair, said: ‘We believe our recommendations would lead to an improvement in the CCRC’s investigatory work, prevent it from being too wary of the Court of Appeal, and allow it to maintain its independence.’

A CCRC statement said there was ‘a strong culture of independence in the organisation’. It pointed out the number of case referrals has ‘risen significantly’ in the past two years, and this business year more cases than ever before have been referred (69 cases). It supported an independent review of the statutory test for referral.

Issue: 7924 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Rule of law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll