4 Consistency and local discretion
104. One theme that has echoed and re-echoed
through the different elements of discussion on the role of the
prosecutor is that of consistency. Stephen Wooler told us "The
area where the CPS needs to improve most is in securing greater
consistency across the organisation in its systems and procedures".[231]
105. We heard the same message for those talking
on behalf of people who received a service from the CPS, who worked
with the CPS or who worked for the CPS. Gillian Guy, Chief Executive
of Victim Support, said:
"a key theme running through what I want to
say on behalf of victims and witnesses would be about inconsistency
and about the differences of approach and a lot of dependency
on action of individuals and personalities as opposed to being
able to understand the system in full".[232]
Tim Godwin, speaking for ACPO, told us: "One
of the big issues
is consistency".[233]
Christine Haswell, from PCS, the public service union representing
approximately 3,000 individuals working at the CPS stated: "One
of the things that does hit me about the service is that it is
not necessarily always one service".[234]
106. Stephen Wooler suggested that one of the
problems was in sustaining and embedding work when new initiatives
came along:
"one of the features [of the treatment of victims
and witnesses in the criminal justice system] has been the development
of good policies; the need to embed those policies at frontline
level has often not been as successful in the longer term as it
might have been. One of the features across the criminal justice
system when we are looking at national initiatives is that because
there has been such an emphasis on improving criminal justice,
initiatives, when they are new, tend to be successful. As managers
turn their attention to other things, then the eye goes off the
ball".[235]
Other witnesses told us that there were often good
policies but these were not always implemented consistently on
the ground. PCS told us: "The thing with the CPS, I have
found, is
a lot of good policies and good working practices,
in theory, but sometimes the actual application varies tremendously".[236]
107. The theme of inconsistency may be linked
to tension over the extent to which the CPS is a national or a
local service. The Director of Public Prosecutions talked about
the balance:
"At the national level there must be common
priorities, common standards, common targets and common policies.
So that runs right through the organisation nationally
It
is delivered locally
You have got to have an appropriate
leader at the appropriate place to plug into the criminal justice
system as a whole
It is not like Tesco where there is one
product which is simply being sold in different areas. The area
has to operate in accordance with other agencies".[237]
This is a theme that goes back to the creation of
the CPS. Sir Cyril Philips recommended in his report of the Royal
Commission on Criminal Justice that the CPS should be "locally
based, but with certain national features".[238]
A national CPS was created following his report. Rt Hon Sir Iain
Glidewell, in his 1998 review of the CPS reiterated, however,
that "the prosecution process is essentially local in nature".[239]
108. The Attorney General talked about how national
standards fit with community responsiveness:
"I think we do have to have clear standards
which are applied everywhere, but how we deliver for a community
will be very much shaped by the needs of that community".[240]
She saw community engagement as a key part of the
decision-making process:
"Prosecutors need also to engage with their
communities to ensure that their public interest decisions are
properly informed by the public's concern about crime".[241]
In April 2009 the Engaging Communities in Criminal
Justice Green Paper committed to the introduction of 'community
prosecutors' in 30 pathfinder areas in 2009-10. The community
prosecutor approach is designed to "enhance the service the
CPS provides to local people and the visibility of its work".[242]
109. Catherine Lee, of the Office for Criminal
Justice Reform, suggested that the CPS's community role grew out
of work it had already started, engaging with wider stakeholders:
"In recent years the CPS has become really good
at looking at domestic violence and rape and adopting a scrutiny
panel approach to that and a much more specialist approach to
how to deal with victims and prosecute cases. I think the time
has come when one applies that kind of approach to looking at
community issues and working closely with the police in charging
suites but also at neighbourhood policing team level to try to
understand the background to what a community is experiencing
and suffering and so help to inform charging or other disposal
decisions".[243]
Some witnesses commended the CPS's approach to equality
issues. Help the Aged commented
"We believe the strong commitment to equality
amongst senior leaders in the CPS has been a key factor in ensuring
the success of the organisation's equality scheme
we believe
the CPS should be commended for its positive approach to equality
issues".[244]
Mind said "Mind has had positive discussions
with the CPS about greater involvement of people with mental distress
in its business planning".[245]
Nevertheless, it and other organisations emphasised that there
was still a way to go. For example, the National Secular Society
suggested a problem for the CPS in joining up with people who
did not have an established community to represent them, such
as "people who keep their faith in the private realm or who
are of no faith at all".[246]
110. Such debates identify a tension for the
CPS in providing a consistent national service whilst being responsive
at a local level to communities and particular circumstances.
It is also part of the ongoing development of the role of the
prosecutor. John Kennedy, Office of Criminal Justice Reform, spoke
about delivery of cross criminal justice targets on reducing antisocial
behaviour:
"The approach has widened the view of the prosecutor
in terms of antisocial behaviour the CPS is currently working
in providing specialist prosecutors in a number of areas to ensure
there is specialist advice about the nature of the law of disorder
and the possible remedies to which it can respond".[247]
111. This opens up questions about two key elements
in the role of the prosecutor. The first is how the role of the
prosecutor contributes to aims of the criminal justice system
such as reducing re-offending. The Attorney General linked the
prosecutor's gatekeeping role to this aim: "it has been very,
very important for us to get the correct level of charging and
that we intervene at an appropriate level to reduce the likelihood
of re-offending".[248]
The DPP also saw tackling crime and re-offending as an "essential
function" of the prosecutor, to be achieved in the first
place through the CPS engaging with communities.[249]
Another element touched upon by John Kennedy is the facility of
the CPS to provide legal advice to the police and more widely.
Nicola Padfield suggested that the CPS is doing this beyond the
area of Anti-Social Behaviour, and said that the CPS website is
"particularly impressive: openly providing guidance in areas
of law which Parliament has somewhat irresponsibly cloaked in
fog".[250]
112. The contribution from the Crown Prosecution
Service to the broader criminal justice system aims of reducing
re-offending is matched by its contribution to broader aims such
as the efficiency of the criminal justice system. The 1997 Persistent
Young Offender pledge, to reduce the time taken between arrest
and conviction for young offenders, sought in part to reduce re-offending
through timeliness (confronting young offenders with the consequences
of their actions quickly to help address their offending behaviour
positively) as well as reduce delays, and therefore improve the
experience, for victims and the public and thereby costs to criminal
justice agencies.[251]
The Magistrates' Association considered the role of the CPS in
both this and the introduction of CJSSS (Criminal Justice Simple,
Speedy, Summary); their concern was that limitations on prosecutorial
resources would risk timeliness gains to the system:
"We are anxious that, if crime increases during
the current recession, the provision of speedy justice in our
courts gained through the introduction of CJSSS (Criminal Justice
Simple Speedy Summary) and the Persistent Young Offender project
are not eroded due to a shortage of funds for prosecutors".
[252]
113. An important aspect to consider in relation
to developments to the role of the prosecutor is whether resources
are available. The Attorney General commented that "one has
to remember that the prosecutors are a relatively small group".[253]
Stakeholders were concerned about the pressures of trends in the
criminal justice system. ACPO noted: "the problem lies in
the capacity. Convictions and trials are going up in large parts
of England and Wales and the fiscal settlement for the CPS will
make that challenging".[254]
114. Inconsistency in CPS delivery
was a clear theme in the evidence we received and must be tackled.
Failures to define clearly the role of the prosecutor, and the
pressures pushing and pulling it in different directions, militate
against priorities for consistent delivery. The definition of
a clear role should include the CPS's contribution to the overall
aims and delivery of an effective criminal justice system. The
development of community prosecutors is a further fundamental
change to what we expect from prosecutors in the criminal justice
system, raising questions about what kind of local discretion
is desirable and beneficial to the public interest. The Attorney
General should make a clear statement of how local responsiveness
can be made compatible with the demands of natural justice for
system-wide consistency.
231 Q 254 Back
232
Q 123 Back
233
Q 41 Back
234
Q 119 Back
235
Q 261 Back
236
Q 119 Back
237
Q 328 Back
238
Sir Cyril Philips, Report of the Royal Commission on Criminal
Procedure, January 1981, Cmnd. 8092-I, para 9.4 Back
239
Sir Iain Glidewell, Summary of The Review of the Crown Prosecution
Service, June 1998, CM 3960, para 10 Back
240
Q 379 Back
241
Ev 62 Back
242
Criminal Justice System, Engaging Communities in Criminal Justice,
April 2009, Cm 7583, para 13 Back
243
Q 60 Back
244
Ev 88 Back
245
Ev 94 Back
246
Ev 102 Back
247
Q 49 Back
248
Q 377 Back
249
Q 298 Back
250
Ev 100 Back
251
http://www.yjb.gov.uk/en-gb/ Back
252
Ev 89 Back
253
Q 372 Back
254
Q 43 Back
|