CCRC must earn back trust after Malkinson errors

The Criminal Cases Review Commission is facing one of its biggest tests in its 29-year history. It must decide whether to send the conviction of Lucy Letby for the murder of seven babies and attempted murder of seven others back to the court of appeal. The level of interest in this case, the volume of medical expert criticism of the prosecution, and the forthcoming public inquiry report make this a challenge unlike any the commission has handled before.

A reputation damaged by past failures

Not long ago, the CCRC looked ill-equipped for that task. Its standing took a serious hit from the cases of Andrew Malkinson and Peter Sullivan. Malkinson spent 17 years in prison for a rape he did not commit. Sullivan was wrongly imprisoned for 38 years for murder. Both men had applied to the CCRC before their convictions were eventually overturned. Another man, Paul Quinn, was convicted last month of the rape for which Malkinson was wrongly found guilty.

A review by Chris Henley KC criticized the way the CCRC handled Malkinson’s case. Inquiries had been allowed to “drift,” he said. The justice select committee argued that the organization appeared unable to learn from its mistakes. Both its chair and chief executive left in the first six months of last year. Vera Baird was brought in as interim chair to steady the ship. Her appointment signaled that change was coming.

Inspectors find the casework sound

A report from the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, published earlier this month, made 34 recommendations for improvement. It pointed to unclear roles and responsibilities, unacceptable delays, and a need for better training. But the report also expressed confidence in the CCRC’s casework. Of the 60 cases examined, all decisions were “ultimately sound.” The numbers back that up: the proportion of CCRC referrals that have led to overturned convictions is at 77.8% this year, after some fluctuation.

For people who have exhausted every other appeal, the CCRC is supposed to be a safety net. That is the only shot they have left at proving their innocence. The commission was created after a 1990s royal commission looked at a string of appalling miscarriages of justice. It serves England, Wales and Northern Ireland as a backstop — an institutional admission that the justice system can get things wrong. Scotland has its own body with a similar role. Applicants can only come to the CCRC after other appeals have failed. In cases like Malkinson and Sullivan, new forensic evidence that didn’t exist at trial was key.

Applications have hit a record high. The CCRC received 1,841 in 2025-26, almost 20% more than the previous year. It is hard to know if that means more wrongful convictions are happening. But it makes avoiding complacency essential. Judges, juries, police and lawyers all make mistakes, and acknowledging that is part of a functioning justice system.

The inspectors concluded that the CCRC is not a “failing organisation.” Dame Vera says all 34 recommendations will be adopted. That offers some reassurance for people who will rely on the commission in the future. An application to the CCRC may be a last resort — but it remains a vital piece of a system willing to look at itself honestly. The commission must also weigh its decision in the Letby case against the growing pressure from medical experts who have challenged the prosecution’s evidence.