Abstract
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) replaced a division at the Home Office, C3, which consisted of 21 staff, plus three staff at the Northern Ireland Office. The division received between 700 and 800 applications a year, of which around 10 per year were referred to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) (CACD). This division was accused of being slow, inefficient, reactive rather than proactive, and of showing too great a deference to the CACD. The Royal Commission on Criminal Justice’s (RCCJ’s) diagnosis of the perceived reluctance of C3 to refer cases to the CACD was that it reflected a constitutional problem: C3 was part of a Government department and, as such, was handicapped in making referrals by the doctrine of separation of powers, which requires the executive not to interfere with the judicial system (RCCJ, 1993: ch. 11).1
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2012 Richard Nobles and David Schiff
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nobles, R., Schiff, D. (2012). After Ten Years: An Investment in Justice?. In: Naughton, M. (eds) The Criminal Cases Review Commission. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245266_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245266_11
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-30488-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-24526-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social Sciences CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)