The Ministry of Justice is to review the system of compensation for wrongfully convicted prisoners.
The justice Secretary Alex Chalk, who is also Lord Chancellor, has asked officials to review the system after there was an outcry when it was revealed that any compensation received by Mr. Malkinson—who served 17 years in jail for a rape he did not commit—would have a deduction made for “saved living expenses.”
In a statement emailed to The Epoch Times, a Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “The Lord Chancellor is committed to ensuring victims of miscarriages of justice are fairly compensated. That is why he has urgently commissioned officials at the Ministry of Justice to look again at the current system to ensure it is working in the best interest of victims.”
On Monday a Downing Street spokesman said Mr. Sunak believed it was unfair for people who had been wrongly convicted of an offence to effectively pay for the cost of housing them in prison.
Mr. Malkinson, 57, was jailed for life with a minimum term of seven years but spent an extra ten years in prison because he maintained his innocence so strenuously.
PM Thinks it is Wrong ‘in Principle’
The prime minister’s press secretary said: “In principle, for someone who is wrongly convicted, I don’t think the prime minister thinks it would be fair for them to have to repay costs, particularly as they have wrongfully been kept in prison for something that they didn’t do.”She said the prime minister “has been speaking with the Home Office and others in government to establish the facts and to make sure the approach is right and fair.”
The current rules can be traced back to a ruling by the Law Lords—a judicial committee of the House of Lords—in 2007.
The Law Lords were later replaced by the UK Supreme Court as the highest court of appeal in the country.
Individuals who are wrongly convicted of a crime have up to two years from the date on which their conviction is quashed to begin the compensation process.
The so-called miscarriage of justice payment is not the only avenue open to Mr. Malkinson.
He could also choose to sue Greater Manchester Police and the Crown Prosecution Service for damages as a result of failures in their investigation, including lack of full disclosure.
At the time of Mr. Malkinson’s trial, there was no DNA evidence and the prosecution case against him was based entirely on identification evidence, which turned out to be inaccurate.
Two witnesses who identified Mr. Malkinson had convictions for dishonesty offences and one was a heroin addict.
But a DNA sample had been taken and was eventually tested in October 2022 and linked to another man, who has since been arrested.
After Mr. Malkinson’s conviction was quashed Greater Manchester Police’s assistant chief constable, Sarah Jackson, said: “We are truly sorry to Mr. Malkinson that he is the victim of such a grave miscarriage of justice in being convicted of a crime he did not commit and serving a 17-year custodial sentence.”
The legal charity Appeal said lawyers working on alleged miscarriage of justice cases were “routinely” denied access to evidence by police forces and the Crown Prosecution Service.
