|
Criminal justice system
Many of our policy
recommendations on human rights standards in criminal trials have been
informed by our previous experience in miscarriage of justice cases. Recent
and current work has focused on the following areas.
Organised
Crime
We
wrote a brieing on the Serious Organised
Crime and Police Bill for the second reading the House of Commons
(December 2004)
We
wrote a response to the White Paper
'One Step Ahead - a 21st Century Strategy to Defeat Organised Crime' (July
2004)
Domestic
Violence
We
wrote a briefing on
the Domestic
Violence, Crime and Victims Bill for
the Grand Committee Stage in the House of Lords (January 2004)
Respect
and Responsibility
We submitted evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee in relation
to the government's white paper Respect
and Responsibility - Taking a stand against anti-social behaviour
(March 2003).
Sexual
Offences Bill 2003
We wrote a briefing for the second reading of the Sexual
Offences Bill 2003 in the House of Lords on Thursday 13 February.
Criminal
Justice Bill 2002
We have written a briefing
on the Criminal Justice Bill for the second reading in the House of
Commons.
We have prepared several briefings on this large and controversial bill
for consideration by the House of Lords. The first deals with parts
1 to 11, and includes our views on defence disclosure, trial without
jury, retrial of acquitted persons and changes to the rules of evidence.
A second briefing deals with sentencing
issues. In addition, there are specific briefings in relation to bad
character evidence, hearsay
and trial without jury
in fraud cases.
The
White Paper 'Justice for All'
We published our
response to the wide-ranging and sometimes radical proposals for the
reform of the criminal justice system contained in the government's white
paper.
Public
defenders
We have carried out
research in the USA to inform our recent report Public
Defenders: Learning from the US Experience. The report was published
to coincide with the first pilot public defender schemes in the UK. Drawing
on examples of federal, state and local services in the US, we analyse
critical success factors and make recommendations on issues of resourcing,
independence, administration and quality control for a salaried defender
system in the UK.
The
Auld review of the criminal justice system
We submitted our response
to the Auld Review of the Criminal Justice system. In August 2001, we
ran a series of seminars
for the Review team.
Mode
of trial
We have responded to successive Government bills and to the Auld review
on the implications of changes to the right
to jury trial.
Double
jeopardy
We responded to the Law Commission
report on double jeopardy and to the Home
Affairs Select Committee.
Mental
health
We have responded to the draft
Mental Health Bill 2002. We responded to the government green paper
on reform of the Mental Health Act 1983, focusing on human rights aspects
of the criminal justice section and carried out a human
rights audit of the Mental Health Review in 1999. We also responded
to government consultation on
dangerous people with severe personality disorder.
Driving law
JUSTICE has responded to the Home
Office consultation on road traffic offences involving bad driving.
We propose reform to the definitions of dangerous and careless driving,
and oppose proposed offences that would make unlicensed and disqualified
drivers liable for any deaths occurring in collisions in which they were
involved, even if the collision was not their fault. We believe that these
offences would infringe basic principles of justice.
Corporate Manslaughter
JUSTICE has responded to the Home Office consultation
on the draft Corporate
Manslaughter Bill.
top
Policing
Our recent work has
concentrated on covert policing and new methods of police surveillance
Covert
Policing
JUSTICE's 1998 report Under
Surveillance: covert policing and human rights standards
examined the increasing use of proactive, intelligence-led policing methods
in light of human rights standards.
The report identified
the inadequacy of data protection controls and highlighted problems with
the legal regime for telephone taps and surveillance devices, particularly
in relation to new technology. It also identified insufficient controls
for the use of informers and undercover operations, and the possibility
that rules of disclosure and admissibility of evidence could undermine
fair trial rights.
Regulation
of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
RIPA was introduced to ensure that all methods of covert surveillance
employed by the police and other public bodies in investigating crime
are placed on a statutory footing so as to comply with the Human Rights
Act 1998.
In our briefings
and human rights audit of
the Bill, we drew attention to key areas of concern on human rights compliance.
We have continued to comment on draft
codes of practice and regulations
drafted under the Act.
Other
work
We drew on the recommendations of Under
Surveillance to comment on the E-Commerce Bill, ACPO voluntary
codes on surveillance and the
Interception of Communications Act (covering the use of participant
informers and undercover police operatives, and the tapping of private
telephone networks).
Training
JUSTICE's work has included training sessions at Bramshill Police Staff
College, in conjunction with the Association of Chief Police Officers,
and training seminars on RIPA and human rights for police and lawyers.
Policing
at EU level
JUSTICE monitors and
comments on policing and criminal justice matters at EU
level.
We scrutinise proposals
for their human rights implications and make responses on relevant issues
to the House
of Commons European Scrutiny Committee.
International
criminal law
We have prepared a
guide to the Rome statute
which establishes the international criminal court.
top
Sentencing
Sentencing
Policy
We participated in the Home Office review of the sentencing
framework, published in July 2001.
JUSTICE is among those
regularly consulted by the Sentencing Advisory Panel.
We are planning to
undertake comparative research on the contribution of restorative justice
in sentencing.
Life
and HMP sentences
JUSTICE has been at the forefront of litigation in lifer and HMP cases
at the European Court of Human Rights. Our work in cases such as Weeks,
Thynne, Wilson & Gunnell, and Hussain helped to establish
judicial control of release for discretionary lifers and juveniles.
Our 1997 report Sentenced
for Life argued for reform of life sentence procedures for adults.
A 1996 report, Children
and Homicide, recommended appropriate procedures for children
convicted of murder or manslaughter.
We have continued
to express our concerns on the use of mandatory life sentences for those
convicted of murder and on the role of the Home Secretary in setting tariffs
and deciding upon release, through our interventions,
briefings and
reports.
At our suggestion,
a Parole Board advisory group, of which JUSTICE is a member, was set up
in 1999.
Following public concern
and our experience in miscarriage of justice cases we
have also had discussions with the Parole Board on access to parole by
prisoners who deny their guilt.
top
Youth justice
Our report, Restoring
youth justice: new directions for international and domestic practice
and law, published in 2000, was the result of a two-year
research programme on restorative justice principles and practice for
young offenders in four countries. Its publication coincided with radical
reforms to our own youth justice system.
Key points amongst
the recommendations of our report were that sufficient resources must
be made available, including prompt legal advice for offenders and support
for victims who take part in the process. We also stressed the importance
of not criminalising young people who make reparation.
We have written a
response to Next Steps,
the government's recent companion document to the white paper on children,
'Every Child Matters'. (December 2003)
top
Miscarriages of justice
The
Criminal Cases Review Commission
JUSTICE first called for an independent statutory body to investigate
miscarriages of justice in 1964. We repeated this call in our 1989 report,
Miscarriages of justice, and in our evidence to the 1993 Royal
Commission on Criminal Justice. Our 1995 report, Remedying miscarriages
of justice, set out a blueprint for a new body, which was established
in 1997 as the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).
JUSTICE staff were
consulted for advice in the early stages of setting up the Commission.
Since the CCRC began
its work, we have stopped taking on casework, but maintain
an interest in developments in CCRC procedures.
Compensation
JUSTICE has repeatedly called for changes to compensation procedures for
people who are released after being wrongly convicted.
At present, compensation
is not immediately available when a conviction is quashed. This is the
time when it is most needed.
JUSTICE has contributed
to a Home Office scoping study and we look forward to taking part in further
discussions on the proposals.
top
Casework
Click here for information
on our past
casework.
JUSTICE no longer
does casework. We recommend the following organisations for help with
individual cases.
If your criminal
appeal has failed, contact:
The Criminal Cases Review Commission, Alpha Tower, Suffolk Street,
Queensway, Birmingham B1 1TT. Tel: 0121 663 1800
http://www.ccrc.gov.uk
For telephone advice
on a range of legal and civil liberty issues:
The Liberty Advice Line on 0845 123 2307
Open Monday 6-8pm, Wednesday 12.30-2.30pm and Thursday 6-8pm
www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk
For telephone advice
on all legal issues:
The Bar Pro Bono Group on 020 7831 9711
You can also order
a copy of our booklet How
to Appeal: a guide to the criminal justice system. It
provides simple, accessible information for prisoners and their supporters
on the criminal appeal system and what they can do.
top
Interventions
in the Courts
JUSTICE makes third
party interventions in cases which have relevance to areas of our work,
including criminal justice and which raise significant human rights issues.
ex
parte Anderson & Taylor 2001
This case, in February 2001, was the first post-Human Rights Act challenge
to the system of tariff setting for mandatory lifers.
ex
parte Pyrah & Lichniak 2001
Our intervention in
February 2001 focused on the development of life sentences, and the significance
of the mandatory sentence within this framework, in a European and Commonwealth
context.
ex
parte Hindley 2000
In 2000 we made an
intervention addressing sentencing issues in whole life tariffs in Hindley
before the House of Lords.
Venables
& Thompson v the UK 1999
Our interventions in the House of Lords and at the European Court of Human
Rights focused on international Convention principles involved in mode
of trial and tariff setting for juveniles in murder cases.
Lord Woolf's November
2000 judgment on tariff for
Venables and Thompson (the James Bulger case) followed many of the arguments
put by JUSTICE in our interventions.
top
|