Under the Criminal Procedure Rules, parties are required to assist the court in the active management of cases, and prosecutors are responsible for serving prosecution evidence on the court and other parties where the rules require it. This includes ensuring that evidence is provided in a format that can be used effectively by the court. The Department is supporting this through work with criminal justice partners on digital case progression, including through the Police Digital Case File programme, and associated improvements to the presentation of digital evidence in court. These reforms are intended to improve the quality and accessibility of case material, reduce reliance on manual processes and help avoid delays caused by missing, incomplete or unusable evidence.

The specific information requested is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective due to the prosecution failing to disclose unused evidence is published quarterly in the Criminal Courts Accredited Official Statistics. The latest available data can be found in the ‘Trial Effectiveness at the Criminal Courts tool’ here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: October to December 2025 - GOV.UK.

The Government is carefully considering the recommendations on the disclosure regime made by Sir Brian Leveson as part of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts, and by Jonathan Fisher KC in his Independent Review of Disclosure Offences.

The Minister will have heard, as I did, the very moving speech of the hon. Member for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols) last week. She really moved the House with her testimony of the terrible experience that she had had as a rape victim, and her experience of delays. She will also have heard her say that, according to the Government, abolishing jury trials will save perhaps only a week. So my positive question to the Government is this: why do we not proceed on the basis of the Labour manifesto? It has its merits and it promised specialist rape trials. Why do we not set up courtrooms in every single courthouse with specialist lawyers and really deal with the backlog now?

It is the prosecution and the defence who decide what evidence to put forward in a criminal trial, including deciding whether to put forward evidence from automated enforcement technology. Once that evidence has been put forward, the magistrates and the judge have a duty to ensure that only admissible evidence is presented to a jury.

What assessment he has made of the potential merits of allowing greater use of evidence from automated enforcement technology in trials.

The Government are to be commended for the largest ever investment in police technology, including facial recognition to catch serious offenders, and a drone squad to crack down on waste crime. However, the rules around admissibility of some high-tech evidence, such as the six-month crime rule, are holding back enforcement, which could enable us to stamp out low-level crime and antisocial behaviour. Can the Minister commit to reviewing these rules to ensure that the latest technology can be used to protect our communities?

The Ministry of Justice does not collate data on cases that are not progressed due to lost, missing or damaged evidence. We keep our data gathering processes under constant review and will need to consider whether the areas identified in the question can feasibly be collected.

Reducing the number of cases which are either delayed or collapse all together due to lost or missing evidence or mislaying of documents is important. As part of our ongoing efforts to improve timeliness and efficiency in our criminal courts, we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake a review of the court operations and make recommendations designed to boost court efficiency in Part 2 of his review. We are awaiting that report in the New Year and will look to act on its recommendations. It is vital that all partners, across the justice system, work together to create a sustainable justice system, including through the Criminal Justice Board, chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on criminal court prosecutions that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics quarterly - GOV.UK.

The Ministry of Justice cannot provide data on cases that are not progressed due to lost, missing or damaged of evidence. This information would only be held in the individual court records and examination of these records would be of disproportionate cost.

The Ministry of Justice’s 2025 impact evaluation of section 28 found that, between January 2019 and September 2022, victims were able to give evidence around five months before the trial. Although trials began one month later on average, the analysis was unable to examine the specific factors causing this delay. While section 28 hearings can occasionally affect scheduling – such as requiring a barrister to leave another trial – the evaluation found no discernible effect on the number of trials that are cancelled or rescheduled as a result of the measure.

The progression of a case through the courts is a matter for the judiciary. Listing and case management decisions are made by the judiciary in collaboration with court listing officers, who prioritise cases involving vulnerable witnesses, including those involving serious sexual offences. To support this, HMCTS has introduced measures such as a national forum for listing officers to share best practice.

Following the recording of section 28 evidence, victims and witnesses are supported through ongoing contact from Witness Care Units. They are offered access to specialist emotional and practical support services, including counselling where appropriate, to help them manage the impact of their experience. In line with their rights under the Victims’ Code, they also receive clear and timely updates on case progress and outcomes.

The Ministry of Justice provides funding for victim and witness support services, including ringfenced funding for sexual violence and domestic abuse services.

The Minister for Victims and Violence Against Women and Girls regularly meets with the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls to discuss shared priorities. These discussions ensure close collaboration across portfolios and a continued focus on improving support for victims throughout the criminal justice process.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service is waiting for the Equality and Human Rights Commission to publish their updated statutory Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations to support service providers. This follows the UK Supreme Court Ruling on definition of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold information on the number of criminal cases that have collapsed due to lost/missing or damaged evidence.

This Government is committed to improving public confidence in the criminal justice system, so that victims feel the system is fair and justice will be done.

The Law Commission is currently concluding its comprehensive review into the use of evidence in sexual offence prosecutions, including the use of evidence relating to victims’ past disclosures. They are reviewing the law, practice, guidance and procedure in sexual offence cases and will make recommendations for reform, so that practitioners throughout the criminal justice system do not unfairly rely on myths and misconceptions when reviewing evidence and making decisions.

We wish to carefully consider the Law Commission’s recommendations on this and on other related measures, to ensure that our approach takes on board their in-depth consideration, and to avoid making piecemeal legislative change.