HL Deb 23 March 1994 vol 553 cc663-5

Lord Spens asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they consider that the consistent annual percentage of between 42 per cent. and 46 per cent. of appeals in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in which that court has quashed convictions is a satisfactory indicator of the state of the legal system.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers)

My Lords, the Court of Appeal exists to ensure that convictions which cannot be considered safe are quashed. But less than half of 1 per cent. of all convictions in the Crown Court are overturned on appeal. That does not seem to me to be an unreasonable figure.

Lord Spens

My Lords, is the Minister aware that behind those percentages lie some 400 individuals who had their convictions overturned last year; some 300 the year before; and some 250 the year before that? Does he agree that were the NHS to lop off a leg twice a day for every working day of the year there would be somewhat of an outcry? Is he aware that the bulk of the reasons for those overturned convictions lies in evidence which has proved to be unsatisfactory in the Court of Appeal for a number of reasons, not least of which is the fabrication of evidence, and evidence which is not disclosed to the defence? What proposals are there to stop that habit of manufacturing evidence to fit the case?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, cases are overturned in the Court of Appeal for a whole variety of reasons. Indeed, the purpose of having a Court of Appeal is to ensure that any cases about which there is doubt can be heard through another channel. In 1992, some 78,000 people were convicted at the Crown Court; nearly 2,000 applied for leave to appeal; 866 appeals were heard; and 318 convictions were quashed. That is 318 out of some 78,000, which is a low percentage. If a large percentage of convictions were overturned, the noble Lord might ask what is happening in the Crown Courts. If a low percentage were overturned, one might wonder what was happening to the sifting system. The whole purpose of the system is to allow for people who, for whatever reason, seek leave to go to the Court of Appeal to have their cases reheard.

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, does not the noble Lord, Lord Spens, have the wrong end of the stick here, because the vast majority of appeals or references to the Court of Appeal are by leave only? That means that there is an arguable point of law and not necessarily evidence which is unsatisfactory. Is it not therefore satisfactory that, given that sift through which cases have to go before they arrive in the Court of Appeal, the percentages which the noble Lord has cited are reasonable?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, my noble and learned friend is entirely correct. Of course, the cases have to be sifted. As I explained in my supplementary answer, 1,900 people applied but only 800 cases were heard, because the sifting system worked. Whether or not the noble Lord, Lord Spens, got the wrong end of the stick depends upon which way one likes to hold the stick.

Lord Ackner

My Lords, I do not know whether the Minister can confirm that, in broad terms, approximately 11 per cent. of convicted persons apply for leave to appeal—that is only a little more than one in 10—and that out of that 11 per cent., in broad terms, only one-third get leave? That reduces the 11 per cent. to approximately 4 per cent. Of the 4 per cent. who have got through the filter, approximately only 2 per cent. succeed. Does the Minister agree that if the Question were framed in what I would submit would be the accurate way, it would show that only 2 per cent. of convictions are overturned in the Court of Appeal, and that that represents a satisfactory situation?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, in general, I agree with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner. Of course it is always difficult when one starts taking statistics, because it depends upon which statistics one takes. When one then moves them into percentages that can be a problem too. The figures that I have show that about 1 per cent. go to appeal and that less than 0.5 per cent. are quashed. It probably depends upon which statistics we operate from, but, in general, I agree with the drift of the noble and learned Lord's question.

Lord Renton

My Lords, is it not a fact that the last answer my noble friend gave was the same as the one he originally gave, and therefore only one convicted person in 200, on average, has his conviction quashed? Could there be any better legal system in the world that produces such a good result?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, that is a variation of the statistics with which I would not disagree. Whether we beat the world with that statistic is not a fact that I am able to confirm or deny, because despite the many statistics that I have been given, comparisons with other countries is not one of them.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, does the Minister agree that we shall have a more fruitful opportunity to debate these matters when we consider the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill this summer? It may then be possible to go into the matter in rather more detail than is possible with a Starred Question. But since the Minister referred to the sifting process, does he agree that if it is too severe then a figure of 42 per cent. to 46 per cent. is probably too high, whereas if it is not severe enough, the percentage is probably too low? Therefore, it is entirely the sifting process, rather than any absolute figure of those which go to the Court of Appeal, which is the significant judgment to be made.

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, we should not become too hung up on statistics, because those who ask leave to go to the Court of Appeal do so arising from a sense of grievance. Whether or not the appeal is allowed depends, of course, upon the merits of each particular case. The statistics result from those merits.

The noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, said that later we shall have a fruitful opportunity to discuss these matters. That is what I feared. I urge the noble Lord to restrain himself from going into too much detail, but of course he is entitled to have his go.

Lord Wigoder

My Lords, if nought per cent. of convictions were quashed, would there not be something very wrong with the system?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, some people might say that it is very wrong; and some people might say that it is very right.

Back to