ICO Consult with CPS
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: UK Government
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
A new duty should be introduced (whether formal or informal) for the Information Commissioner's Office to consult with the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to the exercise of its powers to undertake criminal proceedings.
Leveson Inquiry, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · 29 Nov 2012 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- The ICO has published a Regulatory Action Policy which sets out how it exercises its enforcement powers, including prosecution, but no published evidence of a formal or informal duty to consult with the CPS on section 170 prosecutions has been identified to March 2026.
- No further published evidence on this specific recommendation has been identified.
Sources
Response — verbatim from government
●UK Government
The Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012 that data protection proposals required careful consideration. The Data Protection Act 2018 included some provisions implementing Leveson recommendations on data protection and journalism. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
UK Government · 29 Nov 2012 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 27 Feb 2025 · ICO / CPS The ICO and CPS have working arrangements on prosecution matters. However no formal statutory duty to consult was introduced. The relationship operates on an informal basis. View source → Reasonable Progress
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.