---

14 Oct 2003 : Column 34W—continued

Criminal Cases Review Commission

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what upgrades are being made to the hardware and software elements of the CCRC's IT system. [128883]

Paul Goggins: During 2003–04 there will be a variety of upgrades to the hardware to refresh items, such as PCs, which are now up to six years old. The document management system and other key software packages are also being enhanced, but the most important advance is expected to be in the area of knowledge management.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the implication of the Criminal Justice and Sentencing Bill for the work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission. [128885]

14 Oct 2003 : Column 35W

Paul Goggins: The aim of the Criminal Justice Bill is to create a fair and balanced criminal justice system that convicts the guilty, acquits the innocent and reduces offending and re-offending. The Government do not believe any of the provisions in the Criminal Justice Bill will result in an increase in miscarriages of justice and will not therefore impact on the work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much funding the CCRC received during the year ending 31 March 2003 from Round 3 of the Invest to Save budget; and what this funding was used for. [128887]

Paul Goggins: The Commission received £82,545 from the Invest to Save initiative in 2002–03 to establish electronic file interchange facilities with the Court of Appeal. Considerable progress was made during 2002–03, with accreditation of the necessary secure x.GSI connection on 1 April 2003.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many days on average it took the Criminal Cases Review Commission to respond to correspondence at (a) Stage 0, (b) Stage 1, (c) Stage 2 Screen and (d) Stage 2 in the last 12 months for which figures are available. [128830]

Paul Goggins: All applications are acknowledged within three days. At all other stages during 2002–03 the Commission responded to 99.5 per cent. of correspondence within 10 working days.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many days on average it takes the Criminal Cases Review Commission to complete reviews at (a) Stage 1, (b) Stage 2 Screen and (c) Stage 2. [128831]

Paul Goggins: Reviews at Stage 1 and at Stage 2 Screen are generally completed within 30 working days of allocation. Reviews at Stage 2/3 averaged 216 days in 2002–03.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many decisions on eligibility the Criminal Cases Review Commission made at Stage 1 during the period 31 March 2002 to 31 March 2003; how many intakes there were; and what reasons underlay the difference between these figures. [128833]

Paul Goggins: The Commission made 911 eligibility decisions at Stage 1 during the period 31 March 2002 to 31 March 2003. The intake in this period was 932. The difference is due to the fact that some eligibility decisions take 30 working days to complete.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases were completed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2002–03 at each stage. [128834]

Paul Goggins: The Commission completed 299 cases at Stage 1,498 at Stage 2 Screen, and 189 at Stage 2/3 in 2002–03.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Investigating Officers were appointed each year by the Criminal Cases Review

14 Oct 2003 : Column 36W

Commission during the period from 31 March 1997 to 31 March; and how many cases were investigated each year. [128835]

Paul Goggins: 21 Investigating Officers were appointed during the period from 31 March 1997 to 31 March 2003 (four in 1997–98, four in 1998–99, five in 1999–2000, three in 2000–01, three in 2001–02 and two in 2002–03) to investigate 29 cases.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the (a) case intakes, (b) case completions, (c) case in trays and (d) cases under review by the Criminal Cases Review Commission in each year since 31 March 1997 to 31 March 2003. [128836]

Paul Goggins: The Commission started its work with 279 cases (248 of which had been transferred from the Home Office and the Northern Ireland Office and 31 had been received by the Commission prior to its official start). There were over a thousand applications in each of the first two years. In 1999–2000 the case intake reduced to 777 since when it has been steadily building to 932 in 2002–03. Against this, 310 cases were completed in 1997–98, 492 in 1998–99, and about a thousand in each of the four years since.

Initial staffing levels proved insufficient to cope with the demand resulting in a rising number of accumulated cases, which peaked at about 1,600 in mid-1999. The Home Office provided extra resources in 1990–2000, a further increase in 2000–01 and, following the 2000 Spending Review, for each of the three subsequent years. At March 2003 there were 282 cases awaiting review and 365 under review. The Home Office is working with the Commission to ensure that it has sufficient funding to allow the accumulated cases to be minimised whilst coping with its increased case intake. The Commission is endeavouring to balance this achievement with the need to avoid having too many or too few staff.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many referrals were made to (a) the Court of Appeal and (b) the crown court in England by the CCRC in 2002–03. [128838]

Paul Goggins: Of the total of 196 referrals in 2002–03, 179 were to the Court of Appeal, seven to the crown court in England and Wales, and 10 to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many CCRC referrals had been determined by the courts of appeal by 31 March 2003; of those determined, what the average time was from referral to judgement; how many convictions have been quashed; how many have been upheld; and how many have been varied since 31 March 1997. [128839]

Paul Goggins: Of 196 referrals, 133 have been determined by the appropriate court of appeal. The average time from referral to judgment was 309 working days. 77 convictions have been quashed, 44 upheld. Two sentences have been upheld and 10 have been varied.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many reapplications were made to the CCRC in each year since 31 March 1997, and what proportion this represents of non-referrals. [128840]

14 Oct 2003 : Column 37W

Paul Goggins: Data are only available for the last three years. There have been 25 reapplications in 2000–01, 52 in 2001–02 and 79 in 2002–03. These represent 3 per cent. of non-referrals in 2000–01, 4 per cent. in 2001–02 and 8 per cent. in 2002–03.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many reapplications were referred by the CCRC between 2000 and 2003. [128841]

Paul Goggins: During the three-year period 2000–03, eight reapplications were referred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) complainants and (b) complaints there were to the CCRC in 2002–03; and how many cases were involved. [128842]

Paul Goggins: In 2002–03, 73 complainants made a total of 76 complaints in relation to 75 cases.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time was for the CCRC to (a) acknowledge a complaint and (b) complete an investigation into a complaint in 2002–03. [128843]

Paul Goggins: The average time to acknowledge a complaint in 2002–03 was three working days. The average time to complete an investigation into a complaint was about 29 working days.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints to the CCRC concerned case review actions or decisions in 2002–03; and how many resulted in a change to a case decision. [128844]

Paul Goggins: During 2002–03, 56 complaints concerned case review actions or decisions. None resulted in a change to a case decision.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are being taken to minimise the number of complaints received by the CCRC. [128845]

Paul Goggins: During 2002–03, the Commission carried out a comprehensive audit of the reasons for complaints. The aim was to define changes that could be made to the Commission's processes, communications and training programme to minimise the number of complaints received. Appropriate changes will be implemented during 2003–04.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department of the applications received by the CCRC in 2002–03, how many referred to sexual offences; and how many separate sexual offences were raised. [128846]

Paul Goggins: During 2002–03, 932 applications were received consisting of 1,248 separate offences and 2,038 counts. Of these, indecent assault, rape, and other sexual offences represented 32 per cent. of the offences and 44 per cent. of the counts.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many process improvement projects were active in the CCRC during 2002–03; and what they were concerned with. [128851]

14 Oct 2003 : Column 38W

Paul Goggins: During 2002–03, one process improvement project was active. This was concerned with the development of a more integrated training programme for the Commission.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many case review managers (a) were in post, (b) arrived and (c) left the Criminal Cases Review Commission in each year from 31 March 1997 to 31 March 2003; [128852]

(2) what the turnover rate of case review managers in the Criminal Cases Review Commission was in each year since 1997. [128827]

Paul Goggins: The turnover of case review managers (CRMs) is represented in this table:

Date	CRMs in post	Arrivals during the year	Departures during the year
31 March 1997	9	15	0
31 March 1998	24	8	3
31 March 1999	29	12	5
31 March 2000	36	17	6
31 March 2001	47	9	6
31 March 2002	50	1	8
31 March 2003	43	—	—

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications the Criminal Cases Review Commission received between 31 March 1997 and 31 March 2003; and what the annual intakes to Stage 1 through that period were. [128825]

Paul Goggins: The number of applications was as follows:

	Transfers	New cases to Stage 1	Cumulative
31 March 1997	279	—	279
1997–98	—	1,103	1,382
1998–99	—	1,037	2,419
1999–2000	—	777	3,196
2000–01	—	800	3,996
2001–02	—	834	4,830
2002–03	—	932	5,762

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the percentage change was in the number of applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2002–03 from the previous year. [128826]

Paul Goggins: The number of applications to the Commission was 12 per cent. higher in 2002–03 than in the previous year.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases were (a) awaiting review at each stage and (b) under review at each stage at (i) 31 March, (ii) 31 March 2002, (iii) 31 March 2001 and (iv) 31 March 2000. [128828]

Paul Goggins: The requested information is as follows.

14 Oct 2003 : Column 39W

	Stage 1		Stage 2 Screen		Stage 2/3
	In tray	Under review	In tray	Under review	In tray	Under review
31 March 2000	22	25	702	216	190	217
31 March 2001	23	47	281	286	249	178
31 March 2002	17	14	124	149	199	190
31 March 2003	17	35	104	128	161	194

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many referrals were made by the Criminal Cases Review Commission in the 2002–03 year to 31 March; and how many of those referrals have been determined. [128829]

Paul Goggins: The Commission referred 35 cases to the Court of Appeal in 2002–03. Nine of these referrals of convictions have been determined and all have been quashed. One referral against sentence has been abandoned.

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many referrals by the CCRC have taken advantage of (a) forensic science techniques, (b) advances in psychiatry and (c) advances in linguistics that have been developed or enhanced since the original proceedings. [128847]

Paul Goggins: It would require disproportionate resources to determine exactly how many of the 196 referrals to March 2003 made any use of some form of advance in the fields of forensic science techniques, psychiatry, or linguistics. This is particularly the case given that such use may not have formed a key element of the referral. In some referrals the Commission has taken direct advantage of these techniques, including the use of DNA and ESDA techniques. For example, in one case in which the defence had advanced a seemingly implausible argument at trial, modern DNA techniques supported it and the conviction was quashed. In another referral, ESDA tests cast doubt on prosecution documents and the conviction was quashed. Advances in forensic psychiatry and linguistics have been applied in several referrals, particularly in relation to the reliability of confessions and other evidence.

---