|
|
The
Christchurch Civic Creche Case |
|
|
|
|
At first glance it
might seem as if the call for an independent body to identify miscarriages of
justice was not needed. Surely there are enough
checks and balances in the present court appeal system to weed out injustice.
And surely almost anyone who has ever been sentenced thinks a miscarriage of
some sort has occurred when mostly nothing but justice has been served.
Correct up to a point. Retired High Court
judge Sir Thomas Thorp has gone through 53 applications to the Ministry of
Justice that claimed miscarriages of justice had occurred and found a
staggering quarter warranted further investigation. In fact, he says up to 20
people at present in prison may have been wrongly locked up. One of the first
examples often given of a miscarriage having taken place, and one that Sir
Thomas looked at, is the case of Peter Ellis. There is certainly a strong
case to suggest that this is an error in dire need of formal recognition and
closure, the sort of outcome that might easily come from an independent authority
looking into controversial cases. There are difficulties.
To do the job properly, such a body would need adequate funding and
resourcing, including its own investigative unit. Otherwise it would be just
going over old ground already covered by the courts, and so would be just
another link in an already established line of appeal. The experience of
similar courts in Britain and a separate body in Scotland suggest that unless
the examining body is seen to be totally self-sufficient and independent of
the judicial establishment, then people thinking they have been wronged will
not have faith in a decision "tainted" by previous findings. So where is the money
coming from? From an already stretched justice system? Or will the Government
do what governments often do, introduce a watered-down version that serves no
great purpose? Another concern lies in
human nature. Given half a chance, surely every hood and his dog will be
claiming a miscarriage of justice. Not so says the British experience. The
United Kingdom Criminal Cases Review Commission found that the proportion
between the number of claims and those found to be meritorious has changed
little since the bodies were set up. Yet another area to be
looked into involves what happens once a miscarriage has been found. Will the
claims for massive amounts of compensation then flow? In an ideal world there
would be no need for a body to identify miscarriages of justice. The justice
system would be infallible. But this is far from being an ideal world. Sir
Thomas has shown the need, now it is up to him to convince those in power of
its practicality, always bearing in mind, of course, that it would in no way
be a way of circumventing the legal system itself, just an ambulance at the
bottom of the cliff for the odd case that warrants further attention. |
