Crown Prosecution ServiceEdit
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is the principal public authority responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. Established to centralize and professionalize the process of decision-making in prosecutions, the CPS operates independently of the police and government in deciding whether and how to prosecute. Its remit covers cases brought to magistrates’ courts and to the Crown Court and spans everything from routine offences to complex and high-harm cases. The CPS’s work is guided by the Code for Crown Prosecutors and by the overarching objective of delivering fair, efficient, and proportionate prosecutions that reflect public interests and the rights of suspects and victims. The service acts under the general scrutiny of the Attorney General for England and Wales but retains prosecutorial independence, with the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) as its head.
The Crown Prosecution Service sits within the wider UK justice system and performs its function in parallel with other bodies such as the Ministry of Justice and the judiciary. Its formation was a response to concerns about the police route to prosecution and the perception of politicization in charging decisions. The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 created a structure intended to ensure that decisions about charging and proceeding with prosecutions were made on the basis of legal criteria and public interest, rather than solely on police or political authority. The CPS’s independence is intended to promote consistency, accountability, and public confidence in how criminal cases are pursued.
History and mandate
The CPS began operating in 1986 after the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 established it as the public prosecuting body for England and Wales. Its aim was to provide a central, professional, and independent prosecution function that could apply legal standards uniformly across jurisdictions and regions. While the Attorney General for England and Wales remains a government minister, prosecutorial decisions are made by the CPS on legal merit and public interest rather than political considerations. The service is overseen by the DPP and operates in close coordination with the HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate to ensure accountability, quality, and performance standards across offices and casework.
Role and responsibilities
- Charging and case progression: In most cases, the CPS decides whether to charge a suspect and what charges to bring, based on the two-stage test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors: there must be a realistic prospect of conviction, and it must be in the public interest to proceed. The public interest test weighs factors such as the seriousness of the offence, the circumstances of the offender, and the impact on victims and society. The CPS also sets policies for responding to cases that may be unsuitable for prosecution or that should be resolved by other means.
- Courtroom conduct and case preparation: The CPS prepares cases for trial, instructs counsel where necessary, and presents evidence in court at both the magistrates' court and the Crown Court. It also handles appeals and post-conviction matters where appropriate.
- Specialised areas and victim focus: The CPS maintains specialist divisions to handle complex areas such as terrorism, serious organised crime, fraud and financial crime, and public protection matters. It also emphasizes the treatment of victims and witnesses, including provision of information and support where relevant, in line with statutory rights and guidelines.
- Public and parliamentary reporting: The CPS publishes statistics, reports, and guidance to promote transparency about charging decisions, case outcomes, and overall performance. It operates with a degree of public accountability to Parliament and to taxpayers.
Structure, regions, and operations
The CPS operates across England and Wales with local and regional offices designed to serve communities and police forces across the country. It collaborates with police forces to review evidence, decide on charges, and manage the progression of cases through the court system. The service is organized to handle routine offences as well as high-harm cases requiring specialized expertise, including:
- Public protection and serious crime
- Fraud, economic crime, and financial investigations
- Terrorism and counter-terrorism prosecutions
- Sexual offences and cases involving vulnerable victims
Notable elements of its regulatory framework include the Code for Crown Prosecutors and the oversight provided by the Attorney General for England and Wales and the HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate.
Controversies and debates
Like any central prosecuting authority, the CPS has faced ongoing public and political scrutiny. Typical points of contention include:
- Charging discretion and prosecutorial standards: Critics sometimes argue that charging decisions can be inconsistent or influenced by resource constraints, while supporters contend that the Code for Crown Prosecutors provides a robust framework to ensure decisions are based on evidence and public interest. Debates around the balance between caution and speed in prosecutions reflect broader tensions over how justice is administered in a resource-constrained system.
- Resource constraints and case delays: Under-resourcing can contribute to backlogs and delays, affecting victims, witnesses, and defendants. Proponents of reform emphasize the need for adequate funding and better case management to maintain timely and fair prosecutions.
- Handling of sensitive cases: The CPS’s approach to rape and other sexual offence prosecutions, domestic violence, and cases involving vulnerable witnesses has been the subject of criticism and reform efforts. Advocates note improvements in guidance and training, while critics argue more needs to be done to ensure consistent, evidence-based prosecutions and robust support for victims.
- Joint enterprise and other charging philosophies: Debates continue about how criminal liability should be attributed in complex cases, including joint enterprise doctrines and the extent to which shared culpability should drive prosecutions. The CPS periodically reviews and updates its guidance to reflect evolving legal standards and public expectations.
- Accountability and transparency: While the CPS publishes data and engages with oversight bodies, there are ongoing calls for greater transparency around charging decisions, case outcomes, and the reasoning behind particular prosecutions.
Supporters argue that the CPS’s independence, formal charging standards, and professional specialization help ensure that prosecutions are conducted with legal rigor and public accountability, rather than being driven by police pressure or political considerations. Critics may point to structural constraints, evolving legal norms, and the need for continuous reform to uphold efficiency and public confidence.