In examining the work of the CCRC, it’s about time attention turned to the Court of Appeal’s role in miscarriage of justice cases, says Jon Robins
As controversial as the miscarriage of justice watchdog has proved to its critics, it has performed one role within the criminal justice system very efficiently. The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has long served as a decoy, diverting flak away from the Court of Appeal. The Birmingham-based group has absorbed a relentless barrage of criticism from applicants, appeal lawyers, campaigners and academics (although—as I argued in ‘Justice under review (Pt 1)', NLJ, 19 & 26 April 2019, p7—not the media, who seem to have developed a blind spot on the issue of wrongful convictions).
Some of that criticism might have been more fairly directed elsewhere. The Court of Appeal’s treatment of these most intractable of cases is little understood and rarely scrutinised. As a result of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, only cases with a ‘real possibility’ of being overturned can be referred by the CCRC to the Court of Appeal. The investigative
