Miscarriage-of-justice compensation still requires proof of innocence, decided inside the MoJ

Section 133 Criminal Justice Act 1988 (as amended in 2014) pays compensation only to quashed-conviction applicants who prove innocence 'beyond reasonable doubt' (a test the vast majority of exonerees fail), decided by the Justice Secretary via an internal MoJ assessor, capped at £1m. Andrew Malkinson's case exposed both the test and the absence of any support service for the newly exonerated. The Law Commission's criminal appeals consultation proposes a balance-of-probabilities test, and it will publish a standalone report on compensation and support for the wrongly convicted by end-2026 (main report early 2027, delayed by the Courts and Tribunals Bill). No government commitment to implement exists, and no independent body, as opposed to the department whose system caused the wrong, assesses claims. APPEAL and the Westminster Commission have proposed reform but no institution owns it.

People who lose decades to wrongful conviction routinely leave prison with no compensation, housing or support; Malkinson initially received benefits sanctions letters, not payment. The state compensating almost no one it wrongly imprisoned corrodes confidence in the whole appeals system and removes any financial signal of system failure.

Amend s.133 to a balance-of-probabilities test and uprate or remove the £1m cap (the Law Commission's end-2026 report supplies the blueprint); create an independent compensation body outside MoJ plus a statutory resettlement and support service for exonerees.

// State-led: Instrument: s.133 CJA 1988 amendment and independent compensation body; Law Commission end-2026 report supplies the blueprint.

exonerees must prove innocence to a department-run assessor and leave prison unsupported, with the Law Commission's blueprint due end-2026 but no commitment to implement it.