Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people have had their convictions under Joint Enterprise overturned since 2010.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not undertaken any recent assessment, nor does it have any forthcoming plans, to reform the law on joint enterprise. The Government continues to be of the view that it is for our independent courts to interpret the change to the law on joint enterprise which resulted from the Supreme Court’s decision in R v Jogee, a change that affected a narrow element of the law in this area, specifically that on parasitic accessory liability. The Government will, however, keep the law in this area under review.

The Ministry of Justice only collects information on how many defendants are prosecuted and convicted of specific criminal offences in any given year. Information is not collated on whether a prosecution or conviction relied on the doctrine of joint enterprise, nor is information collated in relation to appeals involving a case of joint enterprise. Such information may be held on court records but there is no means for this information to be collated centrally.

The Government is committed to ensuring that the Criminal Justice System (CJS) treats all those who encounter it fairly – including neurodivergent individuals. That is why the Ministry of Justice commissioned HM Inspectorate of Prisons and HM Inspectorate of Probation, with support from HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS), to undertake an independent review of neurodiversity in the criminal justice system in December 2020. The main recommendation resulting from that review was to develop an overarching strategy together with people with personal experience of neurodivergence. Additionally, the Ministry of Justice also contributed to the Department of Health and Social Care’s refreshed cross-Government Autism Strategy to ensure that it included work to improve data capture on autism, and to increase – through training and awareness – the ability of prison and probation staff to better understand and support these individuals.

In sentencing an individual convicted of a crime, who may also have a mental health disorder, the courts must consider the circumstances of the offender’s case, including their culpability, the harm they caused or intended to cause, and any aggravating and mitigating factors. The courts have a statutory duty to follow any relevant sentencing guidelines and in 2020, the Sentencing Council for England and Wales published a new definitive guideline for sentencing offenders with mental health and developmental disorders and neurological impairments following public consultation. This guideline stipulates that, when assessing whether an offender’s impairment or disorder will have any impact on sentencing, the court should take an individualistic approach and focus on the issues in the case, recognising that levels of impairment caused by any condition will vary significantly between individuals.