My right honourable friend the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Jack Straw) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
I am today announcing that yesterday, on 28 November, I formally asked Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Courts Administration to work with the Chief Inspectors for the Constabulary and the Crown Prosecution Service to conduct a thorough inspection and prepare a report to Ministers into the resulting and warrant processes at Leeds magistrates’ court.
An experienced judge will also be appointed by the senior presiding judge to conduct an independent investigation of the judicial responsibilities of legal advisers at Leeds magistrates’ court.
The concerns about Leeds magistrates’ court relate to two issues: the recording of outcomes of cases principally between 1997 and 2003 and subsequently, in the case of recordable offences, updating the Police National Computer (PNC). This is a process known as resulting. The second related issue centres on a process used for withdrawing warrants issued by the court for the arrest of defendants who fail to appear. The withdrawal of a warrant is a judicial decision.
The investigations will verify the number of cases involved, the breakdown of offences and the position regarding the Police National Computer. The terms of reference are as follows:
“Under Section 60(4) of the Courts Act 2003 and working with HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary and HM Chief Inspector of CPS; the Chief Inspector of Court Administration will report to the Secretary of State for Justice, the Home Secretary and the Attorney-General as necessary on:
5. The effectiveness and appropriateness of the systems enabling a record of every court adjudication to be entered in the magistrates’ court register at Leeds magistrates’ court.
6. The effectiveness and appropriateness of the systems enabling court registers to be conveyed to the police from Leeds magistrates’ court.
7. The effectiveness and appropriateness of the systems enabling court adjudications from Leeds magistrates’ court to be placed on the PNC.
8. The effectiveness and appropriateness of the interagency systems in place to manage warrant withdrawal in Leeds magistrates’ court.
The Chief Inspector of Court Administration will support the separate and independent judicial investigation of the judicial responsibilities of legal advisers at Leeds magistrates’ court, as appropriate”.
In addition, the following actions are in place:
we have started investigating the national process and practice for withdrawing warrants, involving courts, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service. This has identified differing practices across magistrates’ courts which will require further local investigation and may require us to clarify the procedures; and
simultaneously we are writing to all Local Criminal Justice Boards as part of a national review into warrant withdrawal practice across England and Wales and will provide further detailed national guidance should that be required.
Following a proactive national review instigated by officials in January 2007 about the effectiveness of processes for resulting the 2.2 million cases dealt with in the magistrates’ court each year, my officials identified that there were some courts which needed to improve performance and take action to deal with any outstanding cases.
Ministers have been actively engaged in this ongoing work on improving performance in resulting since January.
The majority of outstanding cases were dealt with by the end of May and performance has been improving since. The courts keep performance under regular review to ensure the accuracy of the resulting process. I have however asked HMCS again to review comprehensively the information for any outstanding issues.
However, the national review identified a continuing issue at Leeds magistrates’ court where there was a problem with the process. Where any evidence of misconduct was found, disciplinary investigations have been undertaken. A further investigation is ongoing.
As part of the work that court staff were undertaking to look at these issues, this month they identified a further problem with an historical process dating back to 2003 to withdraw old failure-to-appear warrants which had been agreed by the court, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the police. Although the withdrawal of warrants is entirely appropriate in certain circumstances, the process used in Leeds needs to be investigated.
In June 2006, the Government issued guidance for areas on withdrawing warrants, emphasising the issues that should be taken into account and stressing that the decision to withdraw a warrant is a judicial one. However, over the past few months it has become evident that the issues over the processes used in Leeds were of sufficient concern to merit a detailed inquiry. The issue over the withdrawal of warrants, which was reported to Ministers last week, is of particular concern.
It is for that reason I have asked the inspectors to review all of these matters to provide me with independent assurance that the issues have been dealt with appropriately and to say whether there are any national lessons that we should learn from the experience in Leeds. Together with the review of the process for the withdrawal of warrants and the judicial responsibilities review, I will then be able to assess whether further national actions need to be taken, including improvements to the resulting process.
The resulting of cases and enforcement of warrants are important areas of work. All criminal justice agencies work continually to improve processes and address performance issues where they arise.
HMCS has worked with the police to improve performance and, for the first time, the joint target of having 75 per cent of all case results entered on the PNC within 10 days of the court hearing was met in July 2007 and has been maintained.
We have also improved the enforcement of warrants. From August 2004 until June 2007 there was a 54 per cent reduction in the number of outstanding warrants. Latest data indicate that the number of warrants withdrawn per month has fallen by more than 30 per cent since the same period in 2005.
I will make a further Statement to the House on the findings and facts relating to all these matters, the action that has been taken and the actions that will be taken when the investigations have concluded. The inspectorate report will be published to Parliament.