4
CCRC leadership unnecessarily delayed report publication based on misunderstood election guidance.
Conclusion
The Committee does not understand why the CCRC would consider itself bound by the government’s General Election guidance. Even if it did consider the guidance applicable, we do not understand why applying that guidance would lead to the conclusion that the report should not be published, given that this was not a party-political issue. The report was concerned with the CCRC’s approach to Andrew Malkinson’s applications, not with government decision-making. We accept that after the General Election was called on 22 May 2024, the CCRC might have decided to check with the Ministry of Justice whether the Henley report could be published. However, we were not convinced by Karen Kneller and Amanda Pearce’s explanation that publication was impossible. Given the CCRC’s constitutional independence and the importance of the report, the leadership of the CCRC should have arrived at their own view as to whether publication at the earliest possible date was necessary, whatever the guidance or the Ministry of Justice said. (Conclusion, Paragraph 25)
Government Response
A response document is linked to this report, dated 29 July 2025. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document.
Source
Committee
Justice Committee
Report
3rd Report - Leadership of the Criminal Cases Review Commission
23 May 2025
HC 749
Addressee Bodies
Ministry of Justice
Timeline
Recommendation age
1.3 yr
Report published
23 May 2025