Supreme Court should hear more criminal appeals, law commission recommends
More individuals could turn to the supreme court to challenge their criminal convictions under new proposals by the law commission aimed at making the appeals system more effective and accessible.
The commission was tasked by the previous government to review the law concerning criminal appeals and received over 150 responses to its call for evidence. The recommendations seek to rectify miscarriages of justice and ensure consistency and predictability in the application of criminal law.
Launching a consultation today on the proposed reforms, criminal law commissioner Penney Lewis emphasised the critical role of the criminal appeals system. ‘As the post office scandal has demonstrated, anyone can fall victim to a miscarriage of justice. Our proposals aim to ensure that those who have been wrongly convicted have a fair opportunity to challenge their convictions,’ Lewis stated.
Key proposals
One of the significant recommendations includes extending the time limits for filing an appeal against a conviction or sentence. This change would provide more flexibility for individuals who may have encountered delays in gathering crucial evidence or securing legal representation.
Additionally, the commission proposes widening the scope of unduly lenient sentence referrals. At present, certain offences do not qualify for review, but the new recommendations suggest including crimes such as death by careless driving and animal cruelty under this category. This expansion would allow the courts to reassess lenient sentences that fail to reflect the gravity of the offence.
Reforming the role of the CCRC
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which reviews possible miscarriages of justice, has faced criticism for its handling of cases, such as the wrongful conviction of andrew Malkinson. The law commission’s review, however, was limited to the legal framework governing the CCRC rather than its operational effectiveness.
Currently, the CCRC assesses the likelihood of the appeal court upholding a conviction. The Law Commission believes this approach is flawed and suggests that, instead of predicting how an appeal court might rule, the CCRC should form its own judgment on whether a conviction is unsafe. This change could enable the commission to take a more proactive stance in rectifying wrongful convictions.
Expanding the supreme court’s authority
Under the existing system, the supreme court cannot hear criminal appeals unless the high court or the court of appeal certifies that the case involves a question of law of general public importance. The Law Commission argues that this restriction limits access to justice and that the UK’s highest court should have the discretion to determine which cases it hears.
Expanding the supreme court’s ability to hear criminal appeals could lead to greater clarity and consistency in legal precedents, ensuring that justice is upheld at the highest level.
More Read
Changing compensation rules for wrongful convictions
Another key area of reform concerns the law governing compensation for victims of miscarriages of justice. At present, those seeking compensation must prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt, a standard the law commission deems contrary to the principles of criminal and civil law. Instead, the commission suggests that claimants should only need to demonstrate their innocence on the balance of probabilities—a less stringent requirement that aligns with broader legal standards.
Conclusion
The law commission’s proposals seek to make the criminal appeals system more accessible, fair, and just. By extending time limits for appeals, broadening the scope of lenient sentence reviews, reforming the CCRC’s approach, expanding the supreme court’s authority, and modifying compensation rules, these recommendations aim to correct miscarriages of justice and enhance public confidence in the legal system.
As the consultation process begins, the legal community and the public will have the opportunity to weigh in on these significant reforms, which, if implemented, could reshape the landscape of criminal justice in the UK.
