Select Committee · Justice Committee

Leadership of the Criminal Cases Review Commission

Status: Open Opened: 26 Mar 2025 7 recommendations 35 conclusions 1 report
Clear

Reports

1 report
Title HC No. Published Items Response
3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal Cases Review Commis… HC 749 23 May 2025 42 Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

14 items
2 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC's inadequate apology and statements after Andrew Malkinson's acquittal damaged its reputation.

It should not have taken an independent review for the CCRC to apologise to Andrew Malkinson. The public statements of the then Chair of the CCRC, Helen Pitcher, after Andrew Malkinson’s acquittal were woefully inadequate and showed a worrying lack of understanding of the potential damage to the CCRC’s reputation …

Government response. The government agrees with the committee's conclusion that the previous Chair's statements and handling of the issues damaged the CCRC's reputation. They note the Chair's resignation and that the interim Chair has been tasked with a review to restore confidence …
Ministry of Justice
3 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Karen Kneller's statements on report delays were problematic, requiring further clarification.

Karen Kneller’s statements on 29 April in relation to the version of the report sent to the CCRC by Chris Henley KC in January 2024 are problematic. Chris Henley KC was entitled to be concerned that Karen Kneller had wrongly suggested that he was somehow partly responsible for the delays …

Government response. The government acknowledges the committee's concerns about Karen Kneller's performance and evidence, noting her subsequent resignation on 2 July 2025, which they see as an opportunity to refresh CCRC leadership and restore confidence.
Ministry of Justice
5 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Karen Kneller misrepresented reasons for Chris Webb's resignation over Henley report publication delays.

Chris Webb’s resignation letter to Karen Kneller set out several concerns over the delays to the publication of the Henley report. When asked about the reason why Chris Webb resigned in the evidence session on 29 April, Karen Kneller’s answers did not reflect the content of Chris Webb’s resignation letter. …

Government response. The government acknowledges the committee's concerns about Karen Kneller's performance and evidence, noting her resignation and the ongoing review by the interim Chair, which includes an evaluation of the senior leadership team to restore public confidence.
Ministry of Justice
6 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC inappropriately attempted to limit Henley report's broader conclusions on organisational failings.

We accept that it was appropriate for the CCRC to provide feedback to Chris Henley KC on the version of the report that had been shared with them. However, it was inappropriate for the CCRC to suggest to Chris Henley KC that his report should not draw broader conclusions on …

Government response. The government agrees with the committee's conclusion that the CCRC's handling of the Henley report damaged its reputation, citing the previous Chair's resignation. They note that the interim Chair has been tasked with a review, which includes assessing the CCRC's …
Ministry of Justice
7 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Karen Kneller's denial of CCRC attempts to water down the Henley report was misleading.

In her evidence on 29 April and her letter on 20 May, Karen Kneller denied that the CCRC had attempted to water down the report in any way. Karen Kneller did not inform us in her evidence that one of the reasons the Henley report was delayed was that the …

Government response. The government notes Ms Kneller's resignation and agrees the handling of the report damaged the CCRC's reputation. It outlines an ongoing interim Chair's review, which includes evaluating senior leadership capability to restore public confidence.
Ministry of Justice
8 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC leadership's handling of Henley report demonstrates utter incompetence and spectacular failure.

The leadership’s handling of the Henley report was utterly incompetent. The level of delay and the attempt to minimise the damage to the CCRC’s reputation were a spectacular failure of leadership. (Conclusion, Paragraph 38)

Government response. The government notes Ms Kneller's resignation and agrees the handling of the report damaged the CCRC's reputation. It states that an interim Chair's review is underway to evaluate senior leadership capability and restore public confidence.
Ministry of Justice
16 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC's four-month vacancy for an interim chair is unacceptably long.

The CCRC has now been without an interim chair for four months. This is an unacceptably long period of time for the organisation to be without a chair, particularly following a difficult and turbulent period. (Conclusion, Paragraph 51)

Government response. The government agrees the period without an interim Chair was unacceptably long and turbulent. However, it justifies the delay by stating the importance of securing an exceptional individual with strong leadership and criminal justice experience for the role.
Ministry of Justice
18 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC CEO's justifications for expensive training were unsatisfactory, revealing potential conflict of interest.

We were not satisfied by the justifications given by Karen Kneller for her attendance at expensive training courses in France, using public money. There is a potential conflict of interest in Karen Kneller attending the course at INSEAD on the recommendation of the then Chair who held a board-level position …

Government response. The government acknowledged the committee's concerns regarding the CCRC's then Chief Executive, Karen Kneller, noting her resignation on 2 July 2025 and framing this as an opportunity to refresh the organisation's leadership.
Ministry of Justice
21 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

CCRC leadership failed to adequately lobby MoJ to address commissioner recruitment delays.

Operating without a full quota of commissioners and delays to their recruitment are serious and urgent issues for the CCRC. However, Karen Kneller’s evidence did not appear to reflect this, demonstrated by her response that recruitment is not up to the Commission. While the Ministry of Justice is ultimately responsible, …

Government response. The government acknowledges concerns about commissioner recruitment time and fee levels, explaining the complex public appointment process and expressing hope to finalise appointments quickly.
Ministry of Justice
23 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Ministry of Justice commissioner recruitment and fee negotiation processes are concerningly protracted.

The Ministry of Justice’s approach to commissioner recruitment, including the recruitment of an interim chair, is also concerning. We are shocked that negotiations over the fee paid to commissioners took as long as three years to resolve and that a recruitment exercise that appears to have begun in April 2024 …

Government response. The government acknowledges concerns about the lengthy commissioner recruitment and fee negotiation processes, explaining the need for multi-stage consultation, and expresses hope to finalise appointments quickly.
Ministry of Justice
26 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

2019 MoJ review diminished commissioners' involvement in CCRC key decision-making.

Commissioners, who take the key decisions in respect of the CCRC’s work, are the backbone of the organisation. The arrangements introduced as a result of the Ministry of Justice’s Tailored Review in 2019 changed the role 47 set out for them in statute with the effect that they are now …

Government response. The government refers to the 2019 Tailored Review and states that the interim Chair's review will evaluate the effectiveness of the CCRC's governance and the structural relationship between commissioners and the organisation, implicitly acknowledging the committee's concern about commissioner involvement …
Ministry of Justice
34 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Senior leaders' regular physical presence crucial for conveying operational effectiveness.

The regular physical presence of senior leaders in the office conveys, to staff and stakeholders, that the leadership is present, operational and effective. (Conclusion, Paragraph 96)

Government response. The government agrees that senior leadership presence conveys important messages to staff. However, it clarifies that CCRC staff are public servants, not Civil Servants, and the CCRC Chair and Chief Executive are ultimately responsible for defining the best staff working …
Ministry of Justice
40 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Chief Executive's performance was insufficiently challenged, requiring significant changes by interim chair.

The released extracts from the panel report on the former Chair made clear that one of her main failings was the absence of any evidence that the Chief Executive’s performance was subject to sufficient challenge. It is likely that the interim chair will have to bring about significant changes to …

Government response. The government acknowledges the concerns regarding the former Chief Executive's performance and confirms her resignation, stating this offers an opportunity to refresh leadership and restore confidence. It notes that the interim Chair's review will evaluate the senior leadership team for …
Ministry of Justice
41 Conclusion 3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal… Acknowledged

Karen Kneller's initial evidence was unpersuasive, requiring unsatisfactory further clarification.

The information provided to us by Chris Webb and Chris Henley KC has raised significant doubts regarding the evidence given by Karen Kneller on 29 April. Subsequently, in response to that information, Karen Kneller has provided some clarifications of her statements. We are not persuaded by these clarifications. It is …

Government response. The government acknowledges the committee's concerns about the former Chief Executive's evidence and performance, noting her resignation and the opportunity to refresh leadership. It highlights that the interim Chair's review will evaluate the senior leadership team.
Ministry of Justice

Oral evidence sessions

1 session
Date Witnesses
29 Apr 2025 Amanda Pearce · Criminal Cases Review Commission, Karen Kneller · Criminal Cases Review Commission View ↗

Correspondence

3 letters
DateDirectionTitle
1 Jul 2025 Correspondence from the Lord Chancellor, dated 28 June 2025: Terms of Reference…
21 May 2025 Correspondence to Karen Kneller, Chief Executive of the Criminal Cases Review C…
13 May 2025 Correspondence from Karen Kneller, Chief Executive of the Criminal Cases Review…