Posthumous honours forfeiture policy
IICSA · Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse Linked to Westminster Investigation Report · Issued 25 February 2020 · Addressed to: Cabinet Office
Government responseCabinet Office: Noted (Sep 2020)
DeliveryCabinet Office says in progress (Sep 2020)
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation, I
The Cabinet Office should re-examine the policy on posthumous forfeiture, in order to consider the perspectives of victims and survivors of child sexual abuse.
IICSA, Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse Linked to Westminster Investigation Report · 25 Feb 2020 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
AI-generated evidence summary
The Inquiry asked the Cabinet Office to re-examine posthumous honours forfeiture policy. In September 2020, HM Government stated in a response published by the department that the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals was taking forward an "in-depth review of forfeiture policy in this area" (Cabinet Office response, Sep 2020; Cabinet Office, Sep 2020). It explained that policy changes are made on advice from the committee and stated that it would keep the Inquiry informed of progress (Cabinet Office response, Sep 2020). The response described a review of forfeiture policy, while posthumous forfeiture and the perspectives of victims and survivors were not mentioned in the sources (Cabinet Office response, Sep 2020). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of September 2020 (Cabinet Office response, Sep 2020).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 5 Oct 2026.
Government response
●Cabinet Office · Noted · 18 Sep 2020
The Honours and Appointments Secretariat in the Cabinet Office coordinates the operation of the honours system and supports the Forfeiture Committee and the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals (known as the HD Committee). The HD Committee is the policy forum for the honours system. It gives advice about possible changes to the honours system and military medals policy. This includes responsibility for policy on forfeiture of honours. Its members are senior officials in the Civil Service and the Royal Household. An honour can be revoked if it is determined that an individual has behaved in a way that brings the honours system into disrepute. Specific examples of disrepute include being convicted of a criminal offence, sanctioned by a regulator, or stuck off by a professional body, but any action or inaction can be considered. Recommendations to forfeit are made by the Forfeiture Committee to the Prime Minister, and then to The Queen for approval. The Forfeiture Committee has a majority of independent members and is chaired by a Permanent Secretary, on delegated authority from the Head of the Civil Service. The Committee is not an investigatory body – it does not decide whether or not someone is guilty or innocent of a particular act. Instead, it reflects the findings of official investigations and makes a recommendation of whether or not the honours system has been brought into disrepute. The Committee is also not a policy-making body. Most of the structure and responsibility for the operation of the honours system is therefore independent of the government of the day. Changes to policy on forfeiture are made on advice from the HD Committee, which may in turn be advised by a range of sources including the Forfeiture Committee. The HD Committee is taking forward an in-depth review of forfeiture policy in this area, in response to the recommendations made by the Inquiry. We will continue to keep the Inquiry informed of progress in this area.
Extract from: Government response to the IICSA Westminster report
Delivery
●Cabinet Office says in progress · 18 Sep 2020
The HD Committee is taking forward an in-depth review of forfeiture policy in this area, in response to the recommendations made by the Inquiry.
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.