Miscarriages of justice: a definition

Thesis

To date, debate and discussion about ‘miscarriages of justice’ has occurred without any firm understanding of what the term does, or should, signify. This thesis argues that in light of the significant conceptual distinctions which must be drawn between the numerous flaws and injustices which can arise at each stage of the criminal justice system, the best approach is to aim for a principled and consistent functional definition. The definition offered here is functional in that it provides a means by which attempts to identify and remedy miscarriages of justice can be analysed.

Key to the proposed definition is the act of convicting an individual of a criminal offence. This act is central to the criminal process, and therefore central to any meaningful account of miscarriage of justice. Furthermore, it is an act which is conceptually distinct from any other activity in the criminal justice system, and one which is of such significance that its improper imposition is of such concern that it warrants consideration in isolation.

In a criminal justice system which is premised on the fair and equal treatment of its citizens as moral actors, there are three distinct circumstances in which a conviction cannot stand. The first two concern themselves with situations where an individual is either innocent, or has been put at unfair jeopardy of conviction in circumstances where they may not be guilty. That is: when the individual is factually innocent of the crime of which they have been convicted or when there has been a material breach of a due process protection provided by positive law. The final situation where a conviction ought not to be upheld is not one in which the innocence of an individual is in doubt, but rather where the integrity of the criminal justice system as a whole is impugned.

Other definitions are both possible and plausible, as the distinctions drawn in order to arrive at this point are contestable. However, taken together, these three categories provide a consistent and principled account of the matters which an entity charged with reviewing criminal convictions ought to concern themselves with, and therefore a tool for analysing their success or failure.

Authors: Birdling, M

• Publication date: 2008
• Type of award: MPhil
• Level of award: Masters
• Awarding institution: Oxford University, UK
• Language: English
• Keywords: wrongful convictions; miscarriages of justice; criminal justice; appeals; evidence
• Subjects: Criminal Law