Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
Members of the campaign group Jengba – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association – at a demonstration in Parliament Square in July 2021.
Members of the campaign group Jengba – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association – at a demonstration in Parliament Square in July 2021. Jengba partnered with CCJS on the new report. Photograph: Martin Godwin/The Guardian
Members of the campaign group Jengba – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association – at a demonstration in Parliament Square in July 2021. Jengba partnered with CCJS on the new report. Photograph: Martin Godwin/The Guardian

Joint enterprise ruling has not led to fewer homicide charges, report finds

This article is more than 1 year old

Exclusive: Research suggests prosecutions and convictions of secondary suspects have risen since 2016 judgment

A landmark UK judgment that was expected to lead to a reduction in joint enterprise prosecutions and convictions for homicide has had no discernible effect, while the number of Black people convicted of murder under the controversial doctrine has risen, research suggests.

A 2016 ruling by the supreme court in relation to joint enterprise – where two or more defendants are accused of the same crime in relation to the same incident – found the law had been wrongly applied for more than 30 years and the bar had been set too low with respect to the required intent of any secondary co-accused.

There have long been concerns that joint enterprise over-criminalises and punishes people, including those who may not have committed any serious violence themselves, and it was expected the judgment would lead to fewer prosecutions.

However, a report by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (CCJS) – the first since the ruling to attempt to quantify the impact – suggests this has not happened.

Data on joint enterprise is not published – a criticism the CCJS says should be remedied – so the charity analysed all indictments and convictions of secondary suspects for murder or manslaughter. It found that in the three years leading up to the supreme court ruling, 522 individuals were charged as secondary suspects, while in the three years after, 547 were charged.

There was a similar pattern for homicide convictions of secondary suspects, with 296 from 2013-14 to 2015-16, and 326 from 2016-17 to 2018-19.

Additionally, the number of Black people convicted of murder as secondary suspects rose from 45 to 83 (from 27% to 44% of secondary suspect convictions) when comparing the relevant time periods before and after the judgment.

Jan Cunliffe, of the campaign group Joint Enterprise Not Guilty By Association (Jengba), a partner with CCJS in the research, said: “Jengba campaigners did originally take comfort [after the ruling] from the fact that the daily trauma they continued to face would never happen to another family. However, these findings come as no surprise to us.

“We receive calls from distressed family members on an almost weekly basis. Their confusion and disappointment in the criminal justice system is a harrowing reminder of the urgent need for parliamentarians to step in and put right the draconian measures that are continuing to destroying the lives of so many.”

The report, shared exclusively with the Guardian before its publication, also found little change over the time period examined in the proportion of secondary suspects indicted for murder who were convicted – approximately 40% – and that only one conviction had been successfully overturned since the 2016 judgment.

It echoes previous findings that people from minority ethnic communities, particularly Black people, are consistently over-represented in joint enterprise convictions.

As well as data collection, including on demographics, the report recommends a retrospective review of joint enterprise prosecutions and a parliamentary inquiry into application of the rules.

Richard Garside, the CCJS director, said: “We need our research to be confirmed by future pieces of work, but it suggests that meaningful reform to the controversial joint enterprise rules is desperately needed.”

In the 2016 case, five supreme court justices said the courts had been in “error” since 1984 in treating the fact that a secondary co-accused had foresight that the principal attacker might carry out a killing as sufficient proof of guilt in assisting or encouraging them.

A government spokesperson said: “It is right that those who assist or encourage someone to commit a violent crime are also prosecuted and punished. However, prosecutors assess the evidence against each individual and have to prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that a defendant is guilty.

“Following the supreme court ruling in 2016 which clarified the law on secondary liability, CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] legal guidance was updated and this is publicly available. The MoJ is currently considering the feasibility of collecting data on joint enterprise cases.”

More on this story

More on this story

  • ‘Very dangerous and confusing’: one inmate’s view on joint enterprise law

  • Joint enterprise law: MP’s bill seeks to stop innocent bystanders being jailed

  • Most people prosecuted under joint enterprise from minority ethnic background

  • Joint enterprise prosecutions to be monitored for racial bias

  • The UK should be ashamed of ‘joint enterprise’ convictions. America has put us on notice

  • Laura Mitchell loses appeal against Andrew Ayres murder conviction

  • Senior Tories urge government to review joint enterprise laws

  • Appeal court upholds 'joint enterprise' guilty verdicts

Most viewed

Most viewed