98

Increase use of criminal compensation orders

IICSA · Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report · Issued 19 September 2019 · Addressed to: Ministry of Justice

Government responseMinistry of Justice: Noted (Apr 2020)

DeliveryMinistry of Justice says in progress (Apr 2020)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation, I

The Ministry of Justice should consult with the Sentencing Council, the Judicial College, the Crown Prosecution Service and other relevant bodies, in order to increase the use of CCOs, where appropriate, in cases involving child sexual abuse by, among other things, implementing guidance for the judiciary and prosecutors in the Crown Courts and Magistrates' Courts.

IICSA, Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report · 19 Sep 2019 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

In April 2020, HM Government stated that consultations with the Judicial College, the Sentencing Council, and the Crown Prosecution Service concluded that existing guidance was sufficient, noting that prosecutors are reminded in legal guidance of their role in applying for compensation orders (Ministry of Justice response, Apr 2020; Ministry of Justice, Apr 2020). It also stated in April 2020 that it proposed to explore why courts make low numbers of compensation orders in child sexual abuse cases before deciding whether further steps or guidance would assist (Ministry of Justice response, Apr 2020). The record holds no update since the Ministry of Justice's response of April 2020 (Ministry of Justice response, Apr 2020; Ministry of Justice, Apr 2020).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 26 Sep 2026.

Government response

●Ministry of Justice · Noted · 6 Apr 2020

Words of: HM Government, The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report, published by the Ministry of Justice, 6 April 2020

The Ministry of Justice has consulted with the Judicial College and the Sentencing Council in respect of implementing guidance for the judiciary in the Crown Court and Magistrates’ Courts, and with the CPS in respect of guidance for prosecutors. It is our collective view that the guidance referred to above is sufficient and that judges will already be aware of their sentencing powers, including the power to make a compensation order instead of, or in addition to, dealing with an offender in any other way. In addition, prosecutors will be ready to assist the court by drawing the court’s attention to its powers to award compensation and inviting them to make an order where appropriate, and if they have the evidence to do so. However, we believe it may be helpful to explore our understanding of the reasons why courts make low numbers of compensation orders in cases of child sexual abuse. For example, one reason may be that such cases are very complex and the Inquiry’s report correctly identifies that “The courts have made clear that CCOs [criminal compensation orders] should only be used in simple and straightforward cases, where the amount of compensation can easily be calculated”. As such we propose to undertake further exploration to better understand the reasons behind the low use of this power. Once we have completed this work, we will then consider what steps to take, including whether further guidance would assist. We will provide the Inquiry with a substantive response on our conclusions in due course.

Response document: The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report

Delivery

●Ministry of Justice says in progress · 6 Apr 2020

Prosecutors are reminded of their role in applying for appropriate ancillary orders, including compensation orders, in the CPS legal guidance.

From: The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.