Victims say payment caps are unjust

Victims of miscarriages of justice today condemned government plans to limit compensation payments for people wrongly convicted of crimes.

The victims, who include men wrongly convicted for IRA bombings and mothers wrongly jailed for killing their children, expressed dismay at the home secretary, Charles Clarke's announcement that individual compensation payments would be capped at £500,000. This would be less than a quarter of the largest payouts for wrongful convictions under the current system.

Mr Clarke announced a highly significant ministerial review of the legal test currently used by the court of appeal to quash criminal convictions. It will examine to what extent an error in the trial process necessarily leads to a miscarriage of justice, he said.

Gerry Conlon, one of the Guildford Four wrongly imprisoned for an IRA bombing in 1974, said he was "absolutely horrified" as victims of miscarriages of justice were sent into a "living hell". He labelled the home secretary's plan to slash overall compensation payments by £5m a year as a "penny-pinching, vote-catching exercise".

The capping of specific payments at £500,000 brings them in line with the maximum amount paid to victims of crime.

But solicitor John Batt, part of the legal team that successfully appealed against Sally Clark's wrongful conviction in 1999 for killing two of her children, said comparing victims of crime with victims of miscarriages of justice was like comparing "apples with pears".

Mr Batt said he was "not aware of any excess payments" to victims of miscarriages of justice "or any payments that could be described as excessive."

A discretionary compensation scheme set up by former home secretary Douglas Hurd in 1985 will be scrapped immediately, Mr Clarke said. That scheme paid out £2m a year.

A statutory scheme which currently pays out £6m a year will remain in force but a number of new limitations will be placed on claimants. Mr Clarke said he planned to bring in new laws so that compensation could be reduced to zero because of previous criminal convictions or other conduct by the applicant.

Scrapping the discretionary scheme means people who have been wrongly convicted will not be able to apply for compensation if their cases have been quashed while going through the normal appeal process. Instead they will have to sue for compensation through the civil courts.

Mr Clarke said: "I propose to examine whether, and if so to what extent, an error in the trial process necessarily means a miscarriage of justice. I will consult upon the results of this review as soon as possible. If a change in the law is needed, we will propose it."

A review of this kind was previously recommended by Lord Justice Auld, who proposed allowing the court of appeal to come back with a "not proven" verdict similar to the option available under Scottish law.

Mr Clarke said: "What I think individuals want to see is a situation where the court at all levels could properly assess the likelihood of an individual who is charged with a crime."

Mr Clarke confirmed that one possible option could be to extend the not proven verdict to courts in England and Wales.

"We are going to have a look at it," he said. "It would be a big change. It would be a radical change. The time has come to assess it."

Average final awards for wrongful conviction have increased from about £170,000 in 2003-4 to more than £250,000 in 2005-6, according to Home Office figures. The highest award was £2.1m. In comparison the average award to a victim of crime is just £5,000.

Paddy Hill, one of the Birmingham Six who were wrongfully convicted of the 1974 IRA Birmingham pub bombings, said the announcement had "got nothing to do with justice".

Mr Hill, who says was tortured by the now disbanded West Midlands Serious Crime Squad while in custody, said: "What people seem to forget is that every time you go out on the streets you are liable to be a victim of a crime, what you do not expect is to be tortured and framed and to have evidence falsified against you by the police."

The shadow home secretary, David Davis, described the plans as "an extraordinary reflection of the values of this government."

He said: "Both victims of crime and those who have suffered a miscarriage of justice should be compensated in a fair fashion that reflects the impact of their suffering. In the case of a miscarriage, the need is overwhelming because it is the state that instigated proceedings in the first place."

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, said: "Cutting compensation to people who have suffered sometimes very serious miscarriages of justice cannot be a mere cost-cutting exercise. In some cases people's livelihoods are left utterly destroyed, even if they subsequently win an appeal."

Surjit Singh Clair, spokesman for the Miscarriages of Justice Organisation (MOJO), described the plans as "awful" and predicted a flood of appeals to Europe by victims of miscarriages of justice.

He said victims of miscarriages of justice were already having large parts of their compensation deducted to pay for the "privilege" of board and living expenses in prison.