Category: Government

The UK government is the central executive authority of the United Kingdom, led by the Prime Minister and responsible for national policy, legislation, and administration.

Categories
Government Law

What is a Statutory Instrument ?

Statutory Instrument - Parliament

A statutory instrument is the most common form of secondary or delegated legislation in the United Kingdom. It allows Ministers or other authorised bodies to make detailed rules, regulations, orders, or other provisions under the authority of an Act of Parliament (primary legislation), without Parliament having to pass a completely new Act for every technical or updating measure.

Primary vs Secondary Legislation

Acts of Parliament (primary legislation) set out the broad framework and principles of the law. They are fully debated and passed by both Houses of Parliament before receiving Royal Assent.

Many Acts are intentionally framework-style, leaving detailed implementation such as technical standards, fee levels, commencement dates or procedural rules to be filled in later by secondary legislation. Statutory instruments made under these powers have the full force of law, but they derive their authority from the “parent” or “enabling” Act.

Why Use Statutory Instruments?

Parliament relies on SIs for practical reasons:

  • Efficiency — Primary legislation would otherwise become overloaded with technical detail.
  • Flexibility — Governments can respond quickly to changing circumstances (for example, updating penalty levels for inflation or implementing new safety standards).
  • Volume — Between 1,500 and 2,000 SIs are typically made each year in the UK.

SIs govern a wide range of everyday matters, from traffic regulations and immigration rules to environmental standards and tax exemptions.

How Statutory Instruments Are Made

The process is straightforward and governed by the Statutory Instruments Act 1946:

  1. The parent Act grants a specific power to a Minister (or occasionally another body) to make regulations on defined matters.
  2. Government lawyers draft the SI, often following public consultation.
  3. The Minister signs (“makes”) the instrument.
  4. It is numbered in the annual series (e.g., SI 2026/123) and published on the official legislation website.

Parliamentary Scrutiny: Affirmative, Negative and Other Procedures

The level of parliamentary oversight is set by the parent Act:

  • Negative procedure (most common): The SI is laid before Parliament and comes into force automatically after 40 sitting days unless either House passes a motion to annul it (“pray against”). Successful annulments are rare.
  • Affirmative procedure: The SI (often laid in draft) must be actively approved by resolution of both Houses (or the Commons alone for certain financial matters) before it can be made or come into force.
  • No procedure (or “made negative” in some cases): Many technical or minor instruments, such as simple commencement orders, require no further parliamentary step.

All SIs that are subject to procedure are accompanied by an Explanatory Memorandum in plain English. They are scrutinised on technical grounds by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments (JCSI).

Judicial Oversight and Challenges

While Parliament provides the primary political check on SIs, the courts play an important constitutional role through judicial review. Unlike primary legislation (which cannot be struck down by the courts), secondary legislation such as statutory instruments can be declared invalid if it is found to be unlawful.

The main grounds for judicial review of an SI include:

  • Ultra vires (lack of vires / illegality): The instrument goes beyond the powers granted by the parent Act. Courts interpret enabling powers strictly, especially so-called Henry VIII clauses (powers allowing Ministers to amend or repeal primary legislation).
  • Procedural impropriety: Failure to follow mandatory consultation, laying procedures, or other rules set by the parent Act or the Statutory Instruments Act 1946.
  • Irrationality / unreasonableness: The decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable Minister could have made it (applied cautiously).
  • Uncertainty: The instrument is so unclear or vague that it cannot be understood or applied.
  • Incompatibility with Convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 (where the parent Act does not prevent removal of the incompatibility).

If a court finds an SIs unlawful, the usual remedy is a quashing order that renders the instrument void from the outset. Parliamentary approval does not prevent judicial review.

Examples of Statutory Instruments

Common examples include regulations updating driving licence rules, housing standards or environmental protections; orders setting or amending penalty levels; and commencement regulations that bring sections of a new Act into force.

In October 2013, the Treasury laid before Parliament a short statutory instrument, in relation to Sir Keir Starmer.

Officially known as The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, the measure came into force on the 31st October 2013.

Where to Find Statutory Instruments

You can browse current and historical SIs on the official UK legislation database and Parliament’s dedicated Find a Statutory Instrument website.

Further Reading

Summary

Statutory instruments are a vital and routine part of the UK legislative system. They enable detailed and responsive law-making while remaining grounded in parliamentary authority.

Although they receive less public attention than primary Acts, they constitute the bulk of the rules that affect daily life. They remain subject to both parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight to ensure they stay within lawful bounds.

Check out the related articles on the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Lady Chief Justice, Master of the Rolls, Lord Chancellor, Justice Secretary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Abuse of Process, Government Legal Department (GLD), What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

Sir Kier Starmer

In October 2013, the Treasury laid before Parliament a short statutory instrument, in relation to Sir Keir Starmer, that has since gained unexpected political attention.

Officially known as The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/2588), the measure came into force on the 31st October 2013.

Despite its modest length of just three operative paragraphs, the Regulations addressed a specific technical issue arising from Keir Starmer KC’s departure as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Made – – – – 8th October 2013
Laid before Parliament 9th October 2013
Coming into force – – 31st October 2013

The Treasury, in exercise of the power conferred by section 5(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act
1971(a) and now vested in them(b) hereby make the following Regulations:

Citation and commencement

  1. These Regulations may be cited as the Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, and come into force on 31st October 2013.

    Interpretation
  2. (1) In these Regulations, “the 1971 Act” means the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971.
    (2) For the purposes of these Regulations the time when a pension “begins” is that stated in
    section 8(2) of the 1971 Act(c).

    Pensions to which the 1971 Act shall apply
  3. The 1971 Act shall have effect in relation to any pension payable under the Pension Scheme
    for Keir Starmer QC (being a scheme made under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972(d)),
    as if it were a pension specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act.
The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

Background

Sir Keir Starmer, who is currently the UK Prime Minister, served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 until 2013, leading the Crown Prosecution Service through a period of major reform.

As with other senior public appointments, his remuneration included a pension arranged under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972.

This was a bespoke pension scheme created specifically for the role of DPP, separate from the standard civil service pension arrangements. When Keir Starmer left office, a question arose regarding how his pension would be increased for inflation once it came into payment.

Purpose of The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

The 2013 Regulations were made under section 5(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971. They declared that the 1971 Act “shall have effect” in relation to any pension payable under Keir Starmer’s scheme “as if it were a pension specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2” to that Act.

In simple terms, this ensured that Kier Starmer’s DPP pension would receive the same annual up-rating for inflation as most other public-service pensions. Increases would therefore be linked to the Retail Prices Index (or its successor measures), thereby protecting the pension’s real value over time.

Key Provisions and Scrutiny

Signed by Treasury ministers Desmond Swayne and Stephen Crabb on the 8th October 2013, the instrument was laid before Parliament the next day.

An accompanying explanatory note emphasised its narrow scope, stating that it had “no impact upon the private or voluntary sectors”. A parliamentary joint committee scrutinising statutory instruments noted a minor drafting point concerning the definition of when a pension “begins”. However, the committee accepted the Treasury’s clarification and viewed the Regulations as largely technical in nature.

The underlying pension scheme was tax-unregistered, a common feature for certain high-level public posts at the time. The 2013 Regulations did not create or change this tax status; they simply applied standard indexation rules.

Later Controversy

For nearly a decade, the Regulations attracted little public interest. They resurfaced in March 2023 during debates over the abolition of the lifetime allowance. Some critics portrayed the measure as a “special law” granting Kier Starmer, by then Leader of the Opposition, a personal tax advantage.

Supporters argued that the arrangement was standard practice for the DPP post and that the Regulations merely aligned indexation with other comparable public-sector schemes. Keir Starmer has described the pension as the normal entitlement for the office he held.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of hypocrisy by Conservatives over a tax exempt pension deal he has from a previous job.

Sir Keir criticised measures in the Budget which scrapped the £1m cap on lifetime pensions savings.

The Telegraph reported that Sir Keir got a special “tax unregistered” pension scheme when he stood down as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in 2013.

Labour says it was standard practice for retiring DPPs to get such a deal.

But senior Conservative MP Sir Iain Duncan Smith told The Telegraph it made a “mockery” of Labour’s position on the lifetime pension allowance, and was as “close to hypocrisy as it is possible to get”.

Sir Keir Starmer criticised over tax free pension scheme

Image of The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP – xAI – Grok

Check out our related articles on Statutory Instruments, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Rule of Law, Crown Prosecution Service, Open Justice, What is Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Branches of Law, Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination at the Bar, The Secret Barrister, Barristers, Direct Access Barrister, Barristers Behaving Badly, Inns of Court, Council of the Inns of Court, Bar Standards Board, Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Services, Bar Council, Innocent until Proven Guilty and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is the head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The Director of Public Prosecutions is responsible for the independent prosecution of criminal cases investigated by the police and other agencies.

This role ensures that decisions to prosecute are taken fairly, free from political interference and guided solely by the evidence and the public interest. Established over a century ago, the office has evolved into one of the most influential positions in British law, overseeing hundreds of thousands of cases each year.

Thank you for contacting the Private Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Chief Operating Officer, at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Your email has been received.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) email is [email protected]

Historical Background

The office dates back to the Prosecution of Offences Act 1879, which created the DPP to advise police and handle serious cases. The first holder, Sir John Maule QC, assumed the post in 1880 but operated with limited powers.

After a brief merger with the Treasury Solicitor in 1884, the role regained full independence under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1908. Significant modernisation occurred between 1944 and 1964 under Sir Theobald Mathew QC, who updated regulations, introduced new technology, and expanded staff numbers.

The pivotal moment came in 1986 with the launch of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. This transformed the DPP from leading a small department into the chief executive of a national prosecution service.

Role and Responsibilities

The Director of Public Prosecutions is the third most senior public prosecutor, ranking below the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The holder bears personal responsibility for approximately 7,000 CPS staff and around 800,000 prosecutions annually.

Key duties include applying the Full Code Test to decide whether cases should proceed, advising police during investigations, setting charges in complex matters, and issuing legal guidance and policies. The DPP also presents cases in court where necessary and supports victims and witnesses. Crucially, the role demands strict independence; prosecutorial decisions cannot be directed by government.

The DPP reports to the Attorney General, who accounts for the CPS in Parliament, but day-to-day operations remain free from ministerial control.

The Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code) is issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) under section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. This is the eighth edition of the Code and replaces all earlier versions and was published on the 26th October 2018. Almost 8 years without an update is quite a long time.

Appointment and Current Leadership

The DPP is appointed by the Attorney General for an initial five-year term following an open competition overseen by the Civil Service Commission. The process emphasises integrity, legal expertise, and leadership.

The current Director of Public Prosecutions is Stephen Parkinson, who took office on the 1st November 2023. A University College London law graduate, Parkinson qualified as a barrister in 1980 and later as a solicitor in 2005.

He began as a junior prosecutor in 1984, rose through CPS ranks, and held senior government posts, including Deputy Head of the Attorney General’s Office. For two decades he practised as a defence solicitor at Kingsley Napley, becoming Senior Partner in 2018. His unique experience on both sides of the courtroom equips him to lead the service effectively.

Stephen Parkinson has been announced as the new Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service. It is expected that he will take up the appointment in November 2023 for an initial term of five years. He will succeed the outgoing DPP, Max Hill KC.

Chair of the Bar Council, Nick Vineall KC, said: “The Bar Council would like to congratulate and welcome Stephen Parkinson as the new Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service.  Mr Parkinson practised as a barrister for over 20 years and then qualified as a solicitor and has had a distinguished career in both the public and the private sectors. We very much look forward to meeting and engaging with the new DPP on areas of mutual concern, at a time when the criminal justice sector is under unprecedented pressure, and Crown Court backlogs are at record levels.

“The Bar Council would also like to record its sincere thanks to the outgoing DPP, Max Hill KC, who steered the CPS through the Covid crisis and has always sought to ensure that remuneration for those involved in prosecuting on behalf of the CPS was on a par with criminal defence fees.” 

New DPP Stephen Parkinson announced – Bar Council comment

Stephen Parkinson Legal Experience

Challenges and Future Outlook

Today’s DPP operates under intense pressure. Backlogs, rising caseloads, and high-profile events such as civil disturbances test resources and impartiality.

Maintaining public trust while improving efficiency, supporting victims more effectively, and embracing digital transformation are key priorities. DPP Stephen Parkinson has emphasised collaborative working across the criminal justice system to reduce delays and deliver fair outcomes.

Charlies Prosecution Service (CPS)
Coming Soon at https://cpsgov.uk – Charlie’s Prosecution Service

Image of Stephen Parkinson : PA

Check out our related articles on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Complaints and Feedback, HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI), Rule of Law, Open Justice, Victims’ Right to Review (VRR), Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Complaints and Feedback

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Complaints and Feedback

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) plays a vital role in the UK’s criminal justice system, ensuring offenders are brought to justice while supporting victims and witnesses.

However, like any public organisation, the CPS may occasionally fall short of expectations. This article explores the CPS’s guidance on providing feedback or making a complaint based on their official policy.

HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) has a statutory duty to inspect the operation of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

Charlies Prosecution Service (CPS)
Coming Soon at https://cpsgov.uk – Charlie’s Prosecution Service

The CPS’s Commitment to High Standards

The CPS is dedicated to upholding principles of independence, fairness, honesty, openness, respect, and professional excellence. Their complaints handling is guided by standards such as the CPS Complaints Handling Standard, the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime, and the Principles of Good Complaints Handling from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO).

All complaints are managed confidentially by trained Complaints Coordinators, ensuring fair and sensitive treatment without discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, disability, religion, or belief. Defendants’ complaints are treated equally to those from victims or witnesses.

External oversight is provided by the Independent Assessor of Complaints (IAC), who scrutinises the process to maintain high service levels.

For more on the IAC’s role, visit the CPS website.

What the CPS Complaints and Feedback Policy Covers

Feedback includes positive or negative comments on CPS policies, procedures, services, or performance. Anyone can provide it at any time, with no restrictions. Examples might include praising a new policy or expressing dissatisfaction with a case outcome reported in the media.

Feedback is acknowledged, recorded, and analysed to improve services and promote best practices.

Complaints are expressions of dissatisfaction from those directly involved in a CPS service. They can be:

  • Legal: Related to decisions, such as charging choices.
  • Service: Concerning conduct, like not allowing a victim to read their personal statement in court.
  • Mixed: Combining both elements.

Professional disagreements (e.g., between police and prosecutors) are excluded.

Exclusions from the Policy

Certain matters fall outside the policy:

  • Victims’ Right to Review (VRR): For decisions not to charge or to end proceedings. This stems from the 2011 Killick case and is handled separately. Dissatisfaction with VRR outcomes cannot become a formal complaint. Learn more about VRR on the CPS VRR page.
  • Defence Applications or Appeals: Not for dropping cases or overturning convictions; seek independent legal advice.
  • Ongoing Proceedings: Responses may be limited to avoid prejudice.
  • Civil Claims: Complaints pause if civil action is initiated.
  • Abusive or Persistent Complaints: May be declined.
  • Other Organisations: Direct complaints about police, courts, or judiciary to them (contacts below).
  • Recruitment or Employment: Handled under separate policies.

CPS Complaints Procedure

Complaints can be made by the affected individual or a nominated representative (with written consent).

The process has three stages for service/mixed complaints, but legal complaints end at Stage Two.

Early Resolution

Contact your local CPS office first for informal resolution within three working days, possibly via explanation or apology.

Stage One: Local Review

Submit formally to the originating CPS office. A relevant manager investigates and responds within 20 working days (or notifies of delays).

Stage Two: Senior Review

If unsatisfied, escalate to the Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor or equivalent within one month. Response within 20 working days.For legal complaints, this concludes the process.

Stage Three: Independent Review

For service complaints, refer to the IAC within one month of Stage Two. The IAC, independent of CPS, reviews service quality and procedure adherence, responding within 40 working days.

Contact: Independent Assessor of Complaints, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9EA; Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]); Phone: 020 3357 0893 (10am-4pm, Monday-Friday).

If involving Victims’ Code breaches, victims can escalate to the PHSO via an MP after IAC review.

PHSO details: Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

How to Provide Feedback to the CPS

There is no time limit, and feedback can be submitted via:

  • Online: Use the CPS Feedback Form.
  • Email: Download the form and email to your local CPS Area (addresses on the CPS Areas page).
  • Post: Send written feedback or the form to local CPS addresses.
  • Telephone: Call local CPS offices (numbers on the website).

All feedback helps refine services for the public.

Handling and Outcomes

Complaints are handled confidentially and fairly. You’ll be informed if upheld (wholly/partly) or not. If justified, expect an apology, corrective action and prevention measures.

In rare cases of severe distress or loss due to maladministration, a consolatory payment may be offered.

Check out our related articles on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI), Rule of Law, Open Justice, Victims’ Right to Review (VRR), Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Judiciary Legal Professionals

Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services

Sarah Sackman KC MP - Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services

The role of Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services is a key position within the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), focusing on the operational and policy aspects of the UK’s justice system.

As of January 2026, this post is held by Sarah Sackman KC MP, who brings a wealth of legal expertise to the role.

Sarah Sackman KC MP on Government Plans to scrap Jury trials for crimes with sentences of less than three years

Appointment and Background

Sarah Sackman KC MP was appointed Minister of State in the Ministry of Justice on the 2nd December 2024. Prior to this, she served as Solicitor General for England and Wales from July 2024 until her promotion.

Elected as the Member of Parliament for Finchley and Golders Green in the July 2024 general election, Sackman has a distinguished legal career. Called to the Bar in 2008, she practised as a barrister at Francis Taylor Building and later at Matrix Chambers, specialising in public law, election law, planning, environment and rating law.

Her appointment as King’s Counsel (KC) reflects her standing in the legal profession.The previous holder of the role was The Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, who served briefly in 2024.

Sarah Sackman is married to Daniel Benjamin Squires KC, who represented double killer Fuad Awale.

David Lammy, the Justice Secretary, agreed to pay £7,500 in compensation and foot a £234,000 legal bill for Awale after a judge ruled that his treatment in jail breached his human rights.

Key Responsibilities

The Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services oversees a broad portfolio critical to the functioning of the justice system. These include:

  • Criminal courts policy
  • Legal Aid and administration of the Legal Aid Agency
  • Civil Justice
  • Legal Support and Dispute Resolution
  • Legal Services
  • Administration of His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service
  • Magistrates Policy
  • Open Justice
  • Tribunals Policy (including fees)
  • Irregular Migration
  • Judicial Review
  • Leading the MoJ’s mission to “Kickstart economic growth”

This role plays a vital part in ensuring access to justice, efficiency in the courts, and reforms to legal aid and tribunals.

Recent Developments and Priorities

Since taking office, Sarah Sackman has been associated with several initiatives aimed at improving access to justice and modernising the legal system. Notable announcements linked to the role include:

  • Multi-million-pound investments in legal aid to support victims and enhance access to justice.
  • Measures to increase protection for victims of violence, such as scrapping certain fees.
  • Reforms to enable claimants to challenge powerful organisations in court more effectively.
  • Recognition of cryptocurrency as personal property, positioning the UK as a leader in this emerging area.
  • Investments in court infrastructure, such as new Crown Courtrooms, and promotion of UK legal services internationally.

These efforts supposedly align with the government’s broader goals of delivering “swift and fair” justice, boosting economic growth through a robust legal sector, and ensuring transparency and fairness in the courts.

Daily analysis of Crown Court usage – On the 7th January 2026, 75 out of the 516 Crown courtrooms in England & Wales are not sitting. A staggering 15% of them.

The position underscores the importance of a well-functioning justice system in upholding the rule of law and supporting economic stability.

With her background as a practising barrister and recent experience as Solicitor General, Sarah Sackman is well-placed to drive forward reforms in this challenging but essential area of public policy.

Photo Credit : Sarah Sackman KC MP

Check out our articles on the Justice Secretary, Lady Chief Justice, Lord Chancellor, Attorney General, Solicitor General, Government Legal Department, Rule of Law, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Free Speech Government Law Legal Analysis Police

Think Before You Post !

Think Before You Post - Free Speech

The United Kingdom has long been hailed as a cornerstone of democratic values but recent trends in policing suggest a troubling erosion of free speech. This concern is explored in a Spiked Online 43-minute documentary, Think Before You Post which was released on the 27th October 2025.

Think Before You Post | How the UK fell to a sinister new form of censorship | FULL DOCUMENTARY – Spiked

The film investigates how the UK has increasingly criminalised online speech over the past six decades, using personal accounts and expert commentary to illustrate the impact. It focuses on the aftermath of the 2024 riots, where social media posts led to arrests without direct incitement to violence.

The documentary’s title references the government’s advisory during the riots: “Think before you post” which was employed to caution users against potential prosecution for content deemed hateful.

Think Before You Post – Gov.uk

Overview of the Documentary

The film begins with footage from the 2024 Southport riots, which followed a stabbing incident at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class on 29 July 2024, perpetrated by Axel Rudakubana, a 17-year-old British-born individual of Rwandan heritage.

The attack resulted in the deaths of three young girls Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar along with injuries to eight other children and two adults. This event prompted widespread disorder, exacerbated by online misinformation falsely claiming the attacker was a Muslim migrant.

The documentary details the government’s response, which included not only managing physical unrest but also intensifying scrutiny of online content. It states that approximately 30 individuals are arrested each day in England and Wales for offences related to social media, such as inciting racial or religious hatred or sending communications considered grossly offensive.

Using Home Office figures, the film compares the UK’s more than 12,000 arrests for speech-related matters in 2023 to Russia’s 3,319, highlighting a contrast between a democratic nation and an authoritarian one in terms of regulating expression.

The investigation references legislation including the Race Relations Act 1965 and the Communications Act 2003, which provide a framework for such prosecutions. It notes that while conviction rates are typically around 10%, the process of arrest and investigation often acts as a deterrent to public discussion.

Key Cases and Personal Stories

The documentary presents several cases to demonstrate the application of these laws. Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine, a couple from Buckinghamshire, describe their arrest in January 2025 after an online disagreement with their daughter’s school concerning a headteacher’s appointment.

They were charged with harassment and malicious communications for messages that included describing a teacher as a ‘control freak’. Six police officers arrived at their home, leading to their detention, fingerprinting, and DNA sampling.

Hertfordshire Police said the arrests “were necessary to fully investigate the allegations” but the charges were eventually discontinued due to insufficient evidence, but the experience caused considerable stress, particularly for their daughter who has epilepsy.

Journalist Allison Pearson recounts her investigation for inciting racial hatred following a 2023 tweet about police conduct during an anti-Israel demonstration. Essex Police visited her home on Remembrance Sunday 2024, and although the case was later dropped, she highlights the intrusive nature of the process.

Former Royal Marine Jamie Michael discusses his arrest in July 2024 for a Facebook video expressing views on illegal immigration and child safety after the Southport incident. Despite no advocacy for violence, he was held in custody for 17 days and electronically tagged before being acquitted. The report originated from a Labour politician’s office.

The film also covers the case of Lucy Connolly, a 41-year-old former childminder from Northampton, arrested in August 2024 for a tweet responding to the Southport stabbings: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the bastards for all I care… If that makes me racist, so be it.”

Charged under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 for publishing material to stir up racial hatred, she pleaded guilty and received a 31-month prison sentence from His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman in October 2024. She served about nine months before release on licence in August 2025, following an unsuccessful appeal in May 2025.

Other examples include a 16-year-old autistic girl arrested for likening a police officer to her ‘lesbian nana’, and Harry Miller whose tweet on transgender issues prompted police to suggest he ‘check his thinking’, a decision later ruled unlawful.

Expert Analysis and Broader Themes

Experts in the documentary provide context. Lord Toby Young, founder of the Free Speech Union, states that police priorities have shifted towards recording ‘non-crime hate incidents’ rather than addressing actual crimes.

He refers to ‘two-tier policing‘, where certain expressions, such as those on immigration, are targeted to preserve social order.

Solicitor Luke Gittos examines the 60-year history of hate speech legislation, noting the ambiguity in definitions that allows for variable enforcement. He argues for addressing offensive ideas through discussion rather than legal action and points out the lack of entrenched free speech rights in UK law.

The film discusses a move towards preventive policing, with social media surveillance used to avert potential disorder. It connects this to societal trends, including identity politics and the Online Safety Act 2023, which requires platforms to remove content under regulatory oversight.

The Irony of Self-Censorship

Upon its release on X, the documentary encountered restrictions under the UK’s Online Safety Act, which reduced its visibility.

Spiked reported this in an article on their website “Our documentary about censorship is being censored Thanks to the Online Safety Act, X has muzzled Think Before You Post“.

Conclusion

Think Before You Post documents the implications of criminalising speech in the UK, using individual cases and data to highlight the scale of arrests. It suggests a need to review current laws to protect democratic discourse.

With 59,095 views on YouTube and 334,439 views on X as of the 30th October 2025, the film has prompted discussion among the public and officials about balancing regulation with freedom of expression.

You may wish to consider joining and supporting The Free Speech Union(FSU). The FSU has silver and gold membership with monthly or annual payments options.

Check out our related articles on the Free Speech Union, Free Speech and the Law, Judiciary, Policing, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Government Law Legal Professionals

Government Legal Profession (GLP)

Government Legal Profession (GLP)

The Government Legal Profession (GLP) is the collective network of qualified lawyers embedded across UK government departments and agencies, providing expert legal advice, litigation support, policy guidance, and compliance services to ensure the government operates within the rule of law.

As of 2025, the GLP operates under the Civil Service umbrella and serves as the government’s primary in-house legal resource. The Government Legal Department (GLD) serves as the principal legal adviser to the UK Government.

The Government Legal Profession (GLP) was formally known as The Government Legal Service (GLS).

Key Roles and Functions

The GLP comprises thousands of qualified lawyers (including solicitors, barristers, and chartered legal executives) embedded across government departments, agencies, and devolved administrations.

The government is our sole client.

Whether the government is creating new laws, buying goods and services, or defending its decisions in court, it needs significant levels of legal advice on a range of complex issues.

To carry out this work, the government needs its own lawyers and legal trainees who understand its business.

Government Legal Profession – About Us

Their work is diverse and spans advisory, legislative, litigation, commercial, and employment law. Unlike private practice, the government’s interests are their sole client, requiring lawyers to balance legal rigor with policy considerations, public interest and political sensitivity.

Area of WorkDescriptionExamples
Advisory & Policy SupportProviding legal advice on policy development, ensuring compliance with existing laws, and assessing risks for new initiatives. Lawyers collaborate with ministers, policymakers, and officials to implement manifesto commitments.Advising on whether policies require new legislation; drafting secondary regulations (e.g., Statutory Instruments) that directly impact communities.
Legislative WorkAssisting in creating and scrutinising bills, guiding them through Parliament, and supporting ministers in debates.Preparing proposals for primary legislation; working with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel to ensure laws are enforceable and withstand judicial review.
LitigationRepresenting the government in courts and tribunals, from employment disputes to high-profile constitutional cases in the Supreme Court.Handling judicial reviews, human rights claims, national security matters, and public interest immunity cases; managing a high volume of cases with broader policy implications.
Commercial LawAdvising on procurement, contracts, intellectual property, and state aid to maximise value for public money and minimise spending risks.Developing procurement strategies; negotiating supplier contracts for large-scale projects.
Employment LawSupporting HR functions across government, including policy advice, compliance training, and tribunal representation.Handling non-contentious issues like employment policies; litigating in Employment Tribunals and Appeals.

Structure and Leadership

Impact and Unique Aspects

GLP lawyers enable the government to “govern well within the rule of law” by ensuring policies are legally sound, legislation is robust, and disputes are resolved with public interest in mind.

Their work often involves high-stakes, public-facing issues and contributes to delivering public services efficiently. The rebranding from GLS to GLP highlighted a shift toward viewing government legal work as a unified profession, fostering collaboration across government. For more details, including career opportunities, visit the official GOV.UK page: Government Legal Profession.

Government Legal Department careers

Information on the Trainee Solicitor and Pupil Barrister opportunities available within government departments is published in the Legal trainee scheme guidance.

Information regarding the application and assessment process for the legal trainee scheme is published in the guidance Legal trainee scheme: how to apply.

Legal trainee recruitment enquiries
Recruitment Team
11th Floor, Lower Castle Street
Castlemead
Bristol
BS1 3AG
United Kingdom

Email : [email protected] / Tel : 0117 923 4417

The UK Government’s Government Legal Profession (GLP) also recruits qualified lawyers (barristers, solicitors and chartered legal executives) to provide legal services across departments, primarily through the Government Legal Department (GLD). Information regarding career development, flexible working, salaries and training opportunities is also published as guidance Working for GLP.

Qualified lawyer vacancies across government are advertised on the Civil Service Jobs Website.

The Civil Service is an equal opportunities employer.

Check out the related articles on the Government Legal Department (GLD), Attorney General, Solicitor General, Lord Chancellor, Justice Secretary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Serious Fraud Office (SFO)

Serious Fraud Office (SFO)

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) serves as a vital independent government department in the United Kingdom, tasked with investigating and prosecuting instances of serious fraud, bribery, and corruption. The SFO is overseen by the Attorney General.

As a dedicated watchdog, it protects public confidence in financial systems and maintains the UK’s position as a leading international financial centre. In today’s interconnected and rapidly evolving economic environment, the SFO addresses threats that span borders and pose significant risks to individuals and the wider economy.

The SFO 2024-2029 Strategy emphasises a bold, pragmatic approach alongside efficient resource management, despite ongoing budgetary challenges. This article outlines the SFO’s historical development, operational framework, leadership structure, key prosecutions, and recent initiatives, illustrating its critical role in upholding justice and economic stability.

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) fights complex financial crime, delivers justice for victims and protects the UK’s reputation as a safe place to do business.

SFO is a non-ministerial department.

Serious Fraud Office – What We Do

HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) holds a statutory duty to inspect the operations of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

Historical Development

The establishment of the Serious Fraud Office emerged from the financial turbulence of the 1980s, when major scandals prompted demands for improved corporate governance and criminal accountability. The Guinness share-trading fraud, involving the artificial inflation of share prices during a corporate takeover, highlighted the limitations of conventional police investigations in handling such complexities.

Consequently, the Criminal Justice Act 1987 created the SFO, operational from April 1988, as a specialised entity to identify, investigate, and prosecute the most severe forms of financial misconduct. This initiative drew from the 1986 Roskill Committee’s recommendations, which called for an integrated body combining investigative and legal expertise.

A distinguishing feature of the SFO is its unified model, allowing simultaneous investigation and prosecution under the oversight of the Attorney General, which balances accountability with operational autonomy.

Over more than three decades, the agency has adapted to new challenges, including the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis and the rise of international bribery networks.

Its jurisdiction extends to England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, excluding Scotland and the Crown Dependencies, in line with the UK’s devolved legal arrangements. Official records demonstrate how the SFO has transitioned from a primarily reactive role to one focused on proactive prevention.

Mandate, Powers, and Operations

The SFO focuses on offences that cause substantial harm to the public interest, such as economic disruption, damage to the UK’s international reputation, or cases requiring specialised expertise. The Director authorises investigations based on rigorous criteria set out in the Criminal Justice Act 1987, including powers for compulsory interviews (section 2) and the execution of search warrants.

Additional tools include asset recovery through confiscation orders and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs), which encourage corporate cooperation and remediation.

Beyond domestic efforts, the SFO engages in international collaboration, sharing intelligence on cross-border schemes. During the 2024-2025 fiscal year, it prioritised swift resolutions by closing protracted legacy cases to concentrate on high-potential investigations.

Recent developments, such as the joint SFO-Crown Prosecution Service guidance on corporate prosecutions released in August 2025, strengthen procedures by incorporating provisions like Section 51B of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 for more precise judicial oversight in complex fraud matters. These measures reflect the SFO’s determination to counter an increasingly sophisticated array of economic crimes.

Landmark SFO Cases

The SFO’s record includes pivotal cases that have influenced corporate accountability standards. The 1980s Guinness Share Trading Fraud, involving the manipulation of share prices during a takeover bid, resulted in convictions for insider dealing and false accounting against key figures, including Guinness CEO Ernest Saunders, establishing foundational precedents on market manipulation under the Criminal Justice Act 1987.

In international defence dealings, the 2010 BAE Systems settlement with the SFO imposed a £30 million penalty for accounting irregularities related to a £28 million overpriced military radar system sold to Tanzania in 1999, including undisclosed commission payments; this paralleled a US $400 million fine for Saudi-related issues, marking an early milestone in coordinated global anti-corruption efforts.

Investigations into Barclays Bank, one of the UK’s leading multinational investment banks, have played a prominent role in two major SFO cases.

In the first, concerning the 2008 Qatari fundraising scandal during the global financial crisis, the SFO launched a 2017 prosecution alleging fraud by false representation. This centred on secret £322 million fees linked to a £4 billion emergency capital injection from Qatar.

The case concluded in 2020 with the acquittal of three senior executives, including former CEO John Varley was a significant blow to the SFO.

The second involved Barclays’ role in the Libor manipulation scandal, resulting in the 2016 convictions of three ex-traders—Jonathan Mathew (four years’ imprisonment), Jay Merchant (six-and-a-half years), and Alex Pabon (two-and-a-half years suspended)—for conspiracy to defraud, with total custodial terms surpassing 10 years.

Yet, the September 2025 Supreme Court judgment overturned related convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo owing to erroneous jury guidance on dishonesty. In response, the SFO acknowledged that the Barclays outcomes might also be unsafe.

Organisational Structure and Leadership

Headquartered in London, the SFO employs approximately 500 staff, including barristers, solicitors, forensic accountants, and digital specialists, organised into divisions for operations, legal services, intelligence and policy.

Nick Ephgrave QPM, was appointed Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) on the 25th September 2023 and brings extensive experience from senior positions at the Metropolitan Police Service and the Crown Prosecution Service. Nick Ephgrave has prioritised innovation, as highlighted in his February 2024 speech to the Royal United Services Institute, where he advocated for a more assertive institutional culture.

Claire Bassett is the interim Chair of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) Board.

The SFO Declaration of Interests shows Financial and other interests declared by the Director, Non-Executive Directors and other board members, including details of any recusals.

Serious Fraud Office (SFO)
2-4 Cockspur Street
London
SW1Y 5BS
United Kingdom

Tel : 020 7362 8100 / Email : [email protected]

His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC (Retired) – The High Court Judge That Never Was ! Serious Fraud by the Judiciary ? Can you Email a Judge ?

Check out the related articles on the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, Crown Prosecution Service, Victims’ Right to Review (VRR), Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI)

HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI)

HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) is an independent statutory body established by the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate Act 1999, becoming fully operational in April 2000.

HMCPSI holds a statutory duty to inspect the operations of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) which is responsible for over 500,000 prosecutions annually in England and Wales and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), which handles complex fraud and corruption cases.

The purpose of inspection is to drive improvements and build public confidence in the prosecution process. Our inspections do this by providing independently assessed evidence, which:

While we may make recommendations in our reports, we are not a regulator, and do not have any power to enforce compliance.

HMCPSI has a statutory duty to inspect the operation of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

Historical Background

HMCPSI’s origins trace back to the late 1990s amid concerns over the CPS’s performance following its creation in 1986.

The pivotal Glidewell Review of 1998 commissioned by the government, exposed inefficiencies and recommended an independent inspectorate to monitor prosecutorial standards.

This led to the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate Act 2000, which formalised HMCPSI as a statutory entity in 2000.

Role and Responsibilities

At its core, HMCPSI’s mandate is to inspect the CPS and SFO delivering independent assessments that drive systemic enhancements.

Inspections evaluate case handling, decision-making, and resource allocation, culminating in reports that highlight strengths, weaknesses and actionable recommendations.

While it cannot enforce changes, HMCPSI’s findings empower stakeholders, including Parliament and the Attorney General, to hold agencies accountable. Additionally, it extends expertise to other UK and international prosecution services through collaborative arrangements promoting best practices globally.

Transparency is paramount: methodologies are openly documented, ensuring credibility and fostering trust in the justice process.

We are part of the solution to improving the Criminal Justice System through high quality inspection.

  • We hold the CPS and SFO to account for what they deliver (we make recommendations that drive improvement)
  • Victims will be at the heart of inspection (where we can, we will use victim experience in our inspection)
  • Using our 25 years of experience we will help public prosecutors improve (their legal casework)
  • Inspection will identify and spread best practice
HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) Vison Statement

Organisational Structure and Leadership

HMCPSI operates as a lean, specialised organisation, comprising around 40 staff members divided into inspection, policy, and support teams. The inspection division, led by two Deputy Chief Inspectors, conducts fieldwork and compiles evidence-based reports.

At the helm is the Chief Inspector, appointed by the Attorney General for a fixed term. In January 2025, Anthony Rogers, a seasoned prosecutor with extensive CPS experience, assumed this role, bringing fresh perspectives on efficiency and victim support.

Reporting directly to the Attorney General, the leadership ensures strategic direction aligns with evolving justice priorities.

The operational relationship between the Attorney General and the Chief Inspector is set out in a protocol agreed between the Law Officers (the Attorney General and Solicitor General) and the Chief Inspector.

Recent Activities and Impact

HMCPSI’s 2024-2025 annual report underscores ongoing strains on the criminal justice system, including backlogs exacerbated by post-pandemic recovery.

Key outputs include a follow-up inspection on joint CPS-police operations, where progress was noted on two of four recommendations, and an area review of CPS Yorkshire and Humberside, the third in a phased programme, revealing improvements in case progression but gaps in victim communication. These efforts have spurred tangible reforms, such as enhanced training, affirming HMCPSI’s influence despite resource constraints.

The HMCPSI publish the latest press releases and good practice on their website.

You can contact HMCPSI :-

HMCPSI
7th Floor, Tower
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9GL

Tel : 020 4574 3218 / Email : [email protected]

Check out our related articles on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Complaints and Feedback, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Victims’ Right to Review (VRR), Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Government Law Legal Professionals

The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel

The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel

The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC) is a non-ministerial department within the Cabinet Office and employs specialist government lawyers who draft all government bills presented to Parliament.

The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel converts departmental policy instructions into legislative text that is clear, workable, and designed for enduring use. Subject to parliamentary examination, its output maintains the rule of law by reconciling government intentions with principles of judicial enforceability.

The Office of the Parliamentary Counsel publish guidance about the drafting of legislation, produced by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for members of that office.

The Legislative process: taking a bill through Parliament is an overview of the process by which bills become law.

History and Establishment

The origins of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC) lie in the mid-19th century, when demands grew for standardised legislative drafting to address inconsistencies in government bills.

Prior to 1869, bill preparation was inconsistent: some were drafted by the Home Office counsel for multiple departments, others by independent counsel or departmental officials, resulting in variations that affected the coherence of the statute book.

The OPC was established on 8 February 1869 by a Treasury Minute as a two-year experiment to settle all departmental bills and draft other government bills (excluding those for Ireland and Scotland). Henry Thring was appointed as the inaugural full-time head, with one assistant. In January 1871, a further Treasury Minute made the arrangement permanent, commending Thring’s improvements to bill preparation.

Initially part of HM Treasury, the OPC expanded gradually with rising legislative demands. By 1901, it comprised one Parliamentary Counsel, an assistant, and support staff. Additional Parliamentary Counsel were appointed in 1914 and 1930. By the 1960s, the office had grown to 16 lawyers and support staff.

In 1969, the OPC transferred to the new Civil Service Department and adopted its current name. Following the department’s dissolution in 1980, it became part of the Cabinet Office, where it remains.

Role and Functions

At its core, the OPC drafts all government bills introduced to Parliament, engaging from policy inception through to enactment. This iterative process involves close collaboration with departments, refining drafts to ensure coherence and workability.

Beyond bills, it prepares amendments, reviews subordinate legislation amending primary Acts, and advises on parliamentary procedure and constitutional matters. A dedicated team partners with the Law Commission on reforms and consolidations.

The OPC also fosters legislative excellence through training for Government Legal Department lawyers and publishing guidance, such as the 2022 Common Legislative Solutions guide on penalties and policy devices.

Its counsel, qualified barristers and solicitors, prioritise “good law”: necessary, effective, coherent, and accessible statutes that withstand scrutiny.

Structure and Operations

Headquartered at 1 Horse Guards Road in London, the OPC operates as a nimble unit of 46 counsel and 7 support staff, led by the First Parliamentary Counsel, currently Jessica de Mounteney.

Email : [email protected]

Telephone : +44 (0)20 7276 6586

Check out our related articles on Attorney General, Solicitor General, Lord Chancellor, Justice Secretary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent