Criminal Cases Review Commission
CCRC Answers to Panorama Questions
Here are all of the questions that Panorama put to us and the answers we supplied. We publish them here because, having seen the Panorama programme on 30th May, we did not feel that they had been represented clearly or given sufficient weight.
The CCRC has been accused by certain stakeholders of being “moribund and desk bound” whilst failing to properly investigate some cases. What is your response to that?
There is no sense whatsoever in the idea that office based investigations are, in the context of the type of cases we work with, intrinsically less valuable than any other types of inquiry. Indeed, it is fatuous to suggest that somehow so called “boots on the ground” investigations are always to be preferred and that anything else is lazy or second best..
We consider a lot of cases where the offence in question occurred years earlier. The passage of time will often mean that activities such as visiting the scene of the crime years or decades later can serve little or no purpose. Where that is the case, we won’t waste time on such visits for the sake of presentation or to satisfy some misconceived idea of what an investigation ought to look like.
We do whatever types of investigation we think a case requires. As we demonstrate week in week out in numerous cases, we will take whatever steps we think may be necessary in a case and conduct any kind of inquiries we believe we need from interviewing applicants and witnesses to instructing leading experts in whatever discipline is relevant.
Probably our greatest strength as an investigative body is our unfettered access to the paper trail, and increasingly the digital footprint, left by the investigation, prosecution and trial processes that take place in criminal cases.
The detailed analysis of all that material, and of the products of the various police databases, and sources of intelligence and other sensitive material that only we have access to, are intrinsically desk based activities; we make no apology for doing that skilled and careful work in an office environment. The recent discussion of disclosure issues in the justice system highlights the importance of our legal powers of access to material whether disclosed or otherwise.
Internal board minutes passed to BBC Panorama suggest the commission suffers from poor staff morale, chronic under staffing, high sickness levels and problems with workload. Do you accept these issues affect overall CCRC performance?
It is the everyday work of a Board to be involved in discussions about morale, work load, staff sickness and so on. In fact it would be very odd if these things were not discussed by the Board; that they are should not be taken to indicate that there is any kind of crisis.
Sickness absence is one of our KPIs. We report on this area each year in our Annual Report where we discuss the reasons if our KPI target is missed.
Regarding staff morale, we use the very well known independent company OCR to conduct a staff survey every two years. In recent years we have twice won OCR awards for our results in the area of employee engagement – which broadly equates to staff morale.
Here are the results on morale for the last two surveys (2014 and 2016). The figures that they show are, by any standards, at the very top end of results in this area.
Latest News from
Criminal Cases Review Commission
CCRC disclosure review update15/02/2019 12:20:00
The second phase of the Criminal Cases Review Commission’s internal review of disclosure is now well underway with more than twenty detailed reviews completed.
Commission refers drink driving conviction of William Smith to the County Court of Northern Ireland12/02/2019 16:15:00
The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the drink driving conviction of William Smith to the County Court in Northern Ireland.
CCRC Chairman Helen Pitcher welcomes independent scrutiny of Commission from publication of Government’s Tailored Review and new academic research08/02/2019 15:20:00
It is a stroke of good fortune for me that within a few months of my starting as Chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission there should be two separate and independent accounts scrutinizing how the organisation does its job.
Commission refers the terrorism related conviction of Ismail Abdurahman to the Court of Appeal07/02/2019 13:43:00
Ismail Abdurahman was convicted in February 2008 of assisting an offender and failing to disclose information about acts of terrorism.
Commission refers the joint enterprise murder conviction of Andre Johnson-Haynes to the Court of Appeal16/01/2019 10:25:00
The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the joint enterprise murder conviction of Andre Johnson-Haynes to the Court of Appeal.
Commission refers the travel documents conviction of Sleman Shwaish to the Crown Court30/11/2018 12:25:00
The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the conviction of Sleman Shwaish to the Crown Court.
Commission refers the sexual offences conviction of Neil Secker to the Court of Appeal08/11/2018 09:20:00
The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the sexual offences conviction of Neil Secker to the Court of Appeal.
Commission refers the murder conviction of Gordon Park to the Court of Appeal27/10/2018 10:10:00
The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred Gordon Park’s murder conviction to the Court of Appeal.