Are you OK with cookies?

We use small files called ‘cookies’ on Some are essential to make the site work, some help us to understand how we can improve your experience, and some are set by third parties. You can choose to turn off the non-essential cookies. Which cookies are you happy for us to use?

Skip to content

About the Criminal Cases Review Commission

The Criminal Cases Review Commission looks into criminal cases where people believe they have been wrongly convicted or wrongly sentenced.

These cases are for those who have already lost their appeal. If we do find something wrong with a conviction or sentence, we can send the case back to the Court of Appeal.

To launch a fresh appeal, we need something important like strong new evidence or an argument that makes the case look different now.

How do we operate

We are completely independent. We do not work for the government, courts, police, or the prosecution. We don’t work for anyone applying for a review of their case.

Staying independent helps us investigate alleged miscarriages of justice impartially.  A case can be referred back to the court if significant new evidence or another major new issue affects the safety of the conviction or sentence.

Equality is built into everything we do. We make sure that discrimination does not feature in our services. Our commitment is to create an inclusive culture with equal opportunities for all staff. Ongoing training keeps staff up to date on equality issues.

Where are we based

The CCRC has remit across all of England, Wales and Northern Ireland – but its head office is based in Birmingham

What happens during a CCRC investigation

We can investigate a criminal conviction or a sentence from:

Only the appeal courts can overturn a conviction or reduce a sentence. It’s our job to look at cases and send them back to the appeal courts. We do this if we think there is a good reason to. Any case sent for appeal must be heard by the court. The court cannot add to a sentence just because there is an appeal – even if they turn it down.

We also have special legal powers to investigate cases. These help us to obtain documents from public and private bodies in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. These include information held by the police, the prosecution, and the courts. We can analyse evidence, consider new case law, and instruct scientific experts. We can also trace and interview new or old witnesses.

As an independent we decide what documents to obtain and what investigations to conduct.

We can look at old cases. There is no time limit on any application, but very old cases can be more difficult as papers and evidence may no longer exist.

If you are not legally represented – don’t worry – we can still look at your case. You do not have to have a legal representative to apply, but a solicitor may be able to help you with your application.

We cannot look at prevention orders. We can only look at the resultant conviction or sentence.

Similarly, we cannot look into civil matters or matters relating to immigration.

How it all began

Established by Section 8 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 we began on 31 March 1997.

How the CCRC came into being

The CCRC was created on 31 March 1997, but our creation stems from Section 8 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995.

We have the power to send or refer a case back to an appeal court if we consider that there is a real possibility the court will quash the conviction or reduce the sentence in that case. Before our creation, the only option for a case which had already been to the Court of Appeal (or Northern Ireland Court of Appeal) was a direct appeal to the Home Secretary or the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Only they had the power to order the court to hear a case again.

This power was limited to cases tried on indictment. Only four to five cases were referred each year out of around 700 applications. This was also reactive because the Home Secretary / Northern Ireland Secretary only considered the issues raised by the applicant or his/her representatives and could not investigate or seek new grounds for appeal.

As you would expect this paved the way for frequent criticism since the same person with responsibility for the police had access to the Court of Appeal giving them complete control over the overturning of a conviction.

In the 1970s there was a series of high-profile cases where the convictions were later recognised as miscarriages of justice: The Guildford Four (1974); The Birmingham Six (1975); The Maguire Seven (1976) and Judith Ward (1974). These cases featured false confessions, police misconduct, non-disclosure and issues about the reliability of expert forensic testimony. An additional factor, which doubtless impacted on the decision-making during both the investigation and prosecution of these cases, was their high public profile and the pressure to obtain convictions and restore public confidence.

The weaknesses in the criminal justice system exposed by these cases led to the establishment of a Royal Commission on Criminal Justice in 1991. Its remit included considering changes in the arrangements for viewing and investigating allegations of miscarriages of justice when appeal rights have been exhausted. Evidence was gathered over a two-year period.

The Report of the Royal Commission was published July 1993. The Royal Commission (adopting the view expressed by Sir John May in his Inquiry into the Guildford and Woolwich bombings) took the view that the arrangements for referral of cases back to the courts were incompatible with the constitutional separation of powers as between the courts and the executive.

The recommendations of the Royal Commission led to the Criminal Appeal Act of 1995 which established the Criminal Cases Review Commission.