THE CPS ROLE IN DEALING WITH VICTIMS OF CRIME
1. COMMITMENTS
1.1 The CPS Statement on the Treatment of
Victims and Witnesses by the Crown Prosecution Service (November
1993) is a public document which explains our policies and sets
out how we intend to put our commitment into practice. A copy
of the statement is attached at Annex A[2].
1.2 The Victim's Charter sets out 27 standards
of service that victims of crime can expect from criminal justice
agencies. There are several standards that impact in some way
on the CPS either because they are our sole responsibility or
because we share responsibility for them with another agency,
eg. if delays occur, court staff or a representative of the Crown
Prosecution Service will explain why there is a delay and how
long the wait is likely to be. Performance against the standards
is monitored and published each year in the CPS Annual Report.
1.3 The aim of providing a co-ordinated
service to witnesses is shared by all agencies in the criminal
justice system. The "TIG National Standards of Witness Care
in the Criminal Justice System" sets national parameters
for standards of service for witnesses in criminal cases, eg prosecutors
in magistrates' courts, and prosecuting advocates/CPS caseworkers
who attend the Crown Court, should arrive at court at least 30
minutes before the hearing so that they can introduce themselves
to their witnesses. The standards are implemented through Local
Service Level Agreements which are overseen by local TIGs. Compliance
with six key standards is monitored by national TIG.
2. THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE
VICTIM AND
THE PUBLIC
INTEREST
2.1 The Crown Prosecution Service acts in
the public interest, not just in the interests of any one individual.
But Crown Prosecutors must always think very carefully about the
interests of the victim, which are an important factor, when deciding
where the public interest lies.
2.2 Clearly the interests of the victim
are important; they cannot, however, be the final word on the
subject of prosecution. Crown Prosecutors should also draw a distinction
between a victim's "interests" and a victim's "views".
"Interests" are far more objective than "views"
and Crown Prosecutors should make sure that whilst they are aware
of the victim's views about what should happen in a case, it is
their "interests" which should be considered in the
overall context of the wider "public interest".
3. KEEPING VICTIMS
INFORMED ABOUT
THE PROGRESS
OF THE
CASE
3.1 The 1996 Victim's Charter commits the
police to keep victims informed of developments in the case. They
are the single point of contact charged with giving details of
when someone is caught, cautioned or charged; of any decision
to drop or alter charges substantially; of the date of the trial;
and of the final result. This system relies on the other agencies
concerned supplying relevant information to the police.
3.2 The CPS provide information to the police
about any significant development in the case. This includes any
significant reduction of charge or institution of new charges
or discontinuance, offering no evidence or withdrawal at court.
3.3 Cases involving a death—the police
still have first responsibility to keep the family informed in
good time. However, if the family want to discuss the outcome
of the case with the CPS, they are offered a meeting with a senior
lawyer who will explain their decision on prosecution (Victim's
Charter commitment).
4. CHANGES IN
THE CPS ROLE
4.1 Sir Iain Glidewell's recommendations
resulting from the independent review of the CPS (Recommendation
32) and the recommendations of Sir William Macpherson's report
into the death of Stephen Lawrence (Recommendations 35-37) proposed
that the CPS should take responsibility to communicate decisions
direct to victims rather than via the police.
4.2 A pilot study to test the operational
impact of CPS direct communication with victims was established
in six CPS Areas in November 1999. Subject to funding being made
available, pilot sites will be developed during 2000 to conduct
a scoping/options study which will seek to identify the best way
of delivering an improved level of service to victims. The study
will be overseen by an inter-agency steering group and will be
evaluated after six months. Results of the evaluation will inform
plans for a phased programme of national implementation, for CPS
direct communication with victims, which is intended to commence
in April 2001 (subject to funding being made available).
2 Not printed. Back
| 
