Select Committee · Justice Committee

Private prosecutions: safeguards

Status: Closed Opened: 23 Jun 2020 Closed: 31 Oct 2022 8 recommendations 1 conclusion 1 report
Inquiry scopeThis inquiry examined the safeguards that exist for private prosecutions brought by organisations who act as the investigator, prosecutor but are also the victim of the alleged offence. It looked at: Whether existing safeguards are enough to limit the potential for private prosecutions by large organisations to cause miscarriages of justice The merits of additional safeguards that could be used. Read the call for evidence to find out more about the inquiry .

Reports

1 report

Recommendations & Conclusions

9 items
1 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

The startling figures on the scale of the Post Office’s prosecutions, together with concerns raised...

Recommendation · source text

The startling figures on the scale of the Post Office’s prosecutions, together with concerns raised by the Environmental, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in relation to the RSPCA in 2016 and reports that the number of private prosecutions is rising, justify a proactive approach to examining the effectiveness of the regulation of this area of the criminal justice system. (Paragraph 15) The state of private prosecutions

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
2 Conclusion 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

It is a strength of the current system that it enables corporate victims of crime...

Conclusion · source text

It is a strength of the current system that it enables corporate victims of crime to pursue justice when public authorities decline to intervene. The lack of a prosecution can represent injustice just as much as a prosecution wrongly brought. However, in a modern criminal justice system whether an offence is prosecuted or not should not depend on whether the victim has the financial resources to conduct a prosecution.

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
3 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

The Committee agrees with the CPS that the Government should urgently review funding arrangements for...

Recommendation · source text

The Committee agrees with the CPS that the Government should urgently review funding arrangements for private prosecutions in order to address the inequality of access to the right; to ensure a fair balance between the prosecutor and the defendant; and to ensure the most cost-effective use of public funds. We acknowledge the proposal made by the Centre for Women’s Justice that private prosecutors’ recoverable costs should be capped at legal aid rates. We think there should be no disparity between the claims that can be made from central funds by prosecutors and defendants. We also support the proposal made by the CLRNN that defendants prosecuted by private prosecutors should pay no more than would be paid had they been prosecuted by the CPS. (Paragraph 37) The effectiveness of existing safeguards

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
4 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

The Government should strengthen the safeguards that regulate private prosecutions to ensure that any organisation...

Recommendation · source text

The Government should strengthen the safeguards that regulate private prosecutions to ensure that any organisation that conducts a substantial number of prosecutions is subject to the same regulatory standards and expectations of accountability and transparency as public prosecutors. We recommend that the Government should consider enacting a binding code of standards, enforced by a regulator, that applies to all private prosecutors and investigators. (Paragraph 60) Strengthening safeguards

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
6 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

The Committee recommends that HMCTS should ensure that the CPS is notified when a private...

Recommendation · source text

The Committee recommends that HMCTS should ensure that the CPS is notified when a private prosecution is initiated. The notification process should be integrated into the structure of the central register of private prosecutions. (Paragraph 71) Private prosecutions: safeguards 31

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
7 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

We agree that every defendant who is privately prosecuted should be informed of his or...

Recommendation · source text

We agree that every defendant who is privately prosecuted should be informed of his or her right to seek a review from the CPS. We recommend that this change be implemented by a change to the Criminal Procedure Rules. In situations where the police are involved in a private prosecution and the role of the magistrate is circumvented (which was drawn to our attention by the Criminal Law Reform Now Network) it will be especially important that the defendant is notified of his or her right to request a review of the prosecution. We recommend that in such a scenario there should be a duty upon the police to inform the defendant that they are to be prosecuted by a body other than the CPS and that they have a right to request a review.

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
8 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

There is a strong case that organisations which bring significant numbers of private prosecutions should...

Recommendation · source text

There is a strong case that organisations which bring significant numbers of private prosecutions should be subject to inspections. If an organisation is found to be misusing the power to bring private prosecutions, then the body responsible for inspecting all prosecutors and enforcing the code, be it the CPS, HMCPSI or another public body, should be able to remove the right of an organisation to bring a prosecution, or to require them to obtain consent from the Attorney General or the DPP before they can initiate a prosecution.

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice
9 Recommendation 9th Report: Private prosecutions: safeguards

It is incumbent on the Government to ensure that the rise in the number of...

Recommendation · source text

It is incumbent on the Government to ensure that the rise in the number of private prosecutions does not result in the development of a parallel system where the public interest, accountability and transparency are secondary to private interests. (Paragraph 77) 32 Private prosecutions: safeguards

Link to this item · Read item and full response

Ministry of Justice

Oral evidence sessions

2 sessions

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

Date Session and witnesses Source
25 May 2021 Andrew Marshall · Edmonds Marshall McMahon, Helen Pitcher · Criminal Cases Review Commission, Karen Kneller · Criminal Cases Review Commission, Miles Trent · Criminal Cases Review Commission, Paul Jarvis · Criminal Law Reform Now Network, Stephen Wooler CB · Criminal Law Reform Now Network View ↗
7 Jul 2020
Private prosecutions
Alison Levitt QC · Private Prosecutors' Association, Dr Jesse Elvin · City University of London, Dr Jonathan Rogers · University of Cambridge, Gareth Minty · Private Prosecutors' Association, Ian Henderson · Second Sight Support Services Ltd, Mr Ron Warmington · Second Sight Support Services Ltd, Professor Claire de Than, University of London and Jersey Law Commission, Professor Peter Hungerford-Welch · City University of London, Sandip Patel QC · Aliant Law
View ↗

Who gave evidence

15 witnesses

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

WitnessOrganisationSessions
Alison Levitt QC · Barrister, 2 Hare Court, Private Prosecutors' Association 1
Andrew Marshall · Partner Edmonds Marshall McMahon 1
Dr Jesse Elvin · Senior Lecturer, City Law School City University of London 1
Dr Jonathan Rogers · University Lecturer in Criminal Justice, Faculty of Law University of Cambridge 1
Gareth Minty · Legal Director (Barrister), Mishcon de Reya LLP Private Prosecutors' Association 1
Helen Pitcher · Chair Criminal Cases Review Commission 1
Ian Henderson · Director Second Sight Support Services Ltd 1
Karen Kneller · Chief Executive Criminal Cases Review Commission 1
Miles Trent · Case Review Manager Criminal Cases Review Commission 1
Mr Ron Warmington · Managing Director Second Sight Support Services Ltd 1
Paul Jarvis · Committee Member Criminal Law Reform Now Network 1
Professor Claire de Than, University of London and Jersey Law Commission 1
Professor Peter Hungerford-Welch · City Law School City University of London 1
Sandip Patel QC · Managing Partner Aliant Law 1
Stephen Wooler CB · Committee Member Criminal Law Reform Now Network 1

Correspondence

6 letters

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.