---

PO scandal sparks review of computer rules

The British government is to examine the role of computer evidence in criminal cases, according to the Law Society Gazette of England and Wales.

The move is aimed at preventing future miscarriages of justice after the wrongful convictions of sub-postmasters in the Post Office Horizon scandal.

Britain’s Ministry of Justice yesterday (21 January) announced a call for evidence on how evidence derived from IT systems should be treated in criminal trials.

Presumption of accuracy

Currently, the Gazette says, there is a presumption that computers work correctly and, unless there is evidence to the contrary, any evidence generated by software is accurate.

The wrongful convictions of hundreds of innocent sub-postmasters in the Post Office Horizon scandal highlighted the “limitations” of such a presumption, the ministry said.

It added that “faults in the Post Office’s accounting-software system proved the fallibility of digital evidence and the potential for devastating miscarriages of justice if evidence is not thoroughly interrogated”.

The 12-week call for evidence asks for views from across the justice system and beyond on the presumption that computers always work correctly, as well as how computer evidence should be defined and what could fall into scope of any change to the law.

Lessons

Justice minister Sarah Sackman KC said that the government had to learn the lessons of the Post Office scandal.

“We need to carefully consider how we can both use and interrogate digital evidence in court,” she stated.

The ministry noted that any change requiring the prosecution to prove that any computer device was working correctly could affect the speed at which cases could be completed.

In 2000, section 69 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which covered the use of evidence from computers and required anyone seeking to adduce evidence generated by a computer to show that the system was working properly, was repealed.

Ian Jeffery (Law Society of England and Wales chief executive) said that it was important to consider the relaxation of the rule of evidence, which created a presumption that evidence generated by computers was accurate and contributed to the miscarriages of justice in the Post Office scandal.