header-logo header-logo

19 February 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7875 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Putting the record straight

16238
Michael Zander’s response on recent criminal justice royal commissions

It is rare that I have reason to cavil at what Jon Robins writes, but I take issue with much of what he wrote on criminal justice royal commissions (‘Royal rumblings in Downing Street’, NLJ, 7 February 2020, p7). Since he has many critical comments and says nothing positive, it seems that that he is doubtful about the value of royal commissions in general and of the most recent royal commission in particular.

First, I was surprised by a couple of disconcerting trivial errors. The Philips Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure was set up in 1978 and reported in 1981. It therefore was not ‘the 1984 Philips Royal Commission’. The Runciman Royal Commission on Criminal Justice (of which I was a member) was set up in 1991 and reported in 1993 and was therefore not ‘the 1996 Royal Commission’.

What is not trivial is Robins’s statement that Runciman ‘completely failed to tackle the Court of Appeal and its reluctance

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

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll