News blog

Reformers look to cast dubious ‘evidence’ out of English courts

justice.jpgEnglish law should be reformed to prevent dubious scientific evidence causing miscarriages of justice, according a government advisory group.

A report from the Law Commission cites a number of incidents in which questionable evidence has been accepted by courts under the current “laissez-faire” approach to expert evidence.

“Juries may therefore be reaching conclusions on the basis of unreliable evidence,” says the Commission (statement). “This conclusion is confirmed by a number of miscarriages of justice in recent years.”

The Commission, an independent body created to review the laws of England and Wales and suggest reforms to government, proposes a new ‘reliability test’ for so-called expert evidence. Judges would have to be satisfied that the evidence in question was solid and they should also be given the power to call up their own impartial expert witnesses to help apply the test.

Key reasons ‘expert’ opinion might be thrown out include it not having been subjected to appropriate experimental testing. Judges should also consider whether the material upon which such opinions are based has been peer-reviewed.

Although the Commission hopes that its recommendations go forward to form new legislation, the Ministry of Justice gave the report a lukewarm response today.

“Existing common law provisions on the use of expert evidence in court include the need for expert witnesses to be impartial and for expert evidence to be reliable,” said a statement from the Ministry. “In addition, criminal procedure rules include detailed guidance on reports submitted by expert witnesses.”

A full response to the report will be issued “in due course”, it adds.

Image: statue of Justice, London. Photo by Charles DP Miller via Flickr under creative commons.

Comments

Comments are closed.