header-logo header-logo

03 March 2021 / Aziz Rahman
Issue: 7923 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Misconduct in public office: time for change

41389
Aziz Rahman discusses the need for clarity on a centuries-old offence which remains as ambiguous as it is confusing

The fact that the Law Commission has made proposals for changes to the offence of misconduct in public office is obviously newsworthy. But, for two reasons, it should not be considered surprising.

For one, the proposals are the result of a lengthy and well-publicised consultation. There was always going to be something put forward by the commission after it had completed its in-depth review. Secondly, the offence of misconduct in public office has arguably been in need of reform for years. As the commission itself has said, the offence has for a long time been viewed as being poorly defined. The fact that the government, the Court of Appeal, commentators and academics have been critics of it is a clear indicator of its shortcomings—and the need for changes.

The need for reform

Misconduct in public office is a common law offence. For a successful prosecution, it must be shown

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll