The New Zealand Criminal Cases Review Commission, or CCRC, , is a Statutory Crown Entity that was established by the Criminal Cases Review Commission Act 2019 to investigate potential miscarriages of justice. If the Commission considers a miscarriage may have occurred, it can refer the case back to the Court of Appeal to be reconsidered.
The Commission was established on 1 July 2020. It replaces the referral function of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy whereby the Governor-General, following a review of the case by the Ministry of Justice, could recommend the Appeal Court reconsider the case. The Governor-General still has the authority to grant a free or conditional pardon, suspend the execution of any sentence, or remit a sentence, whereas the CCRC does not have such powers.
The need for an independent commission arose because of a growing number of high profile miscarriages of justice in New Zealand and concerns that the Ministry of Justice is not independent of the Crown or the judiciary, with the result that the granting of pardons by the Governor-General has been extremely rare in New Zealand. The last person to receive such a pardon was Arthur Allan Thomas in 1979. The Crewe murders: The dramatic path to Arthur Allan Thomas’s pardon, NZ Listener, 5 December 2023 Since 1995, only 15 cases out of 166 applications for the RPM were sent back to the courts for further consideration.Establishing a Criminal Cases Review Commission, Ministry of Justice 9 November 2017
The Commission is based in Hamilton in order to increase its independence from the Crown and government agencies in Wellington and Auckland. It is governed by a board of appointed commissioners. It employs specialist staff with the mandate to investigate possible miscarriages of justice, but does not decide innocence or guilt.
The National Party opposed its establishment, and in 2024, appointed a retired judge as head of the Commission, potentially undermining its independence.Criminal Cases Review Commission Bill — Second Reading, Hansard Debates In November 2025, it was reported in the media that a review the Commission had been conducting into the impact of eyewitness testimony, which has contributed to a number of miscarriages of justice, has been delayed and substantially scaled back. Wrongful conviction organisation fails to deliver promised inquiry, The Post, 2 November 2025
Background In 2006, Sir Thomas Thorp, a retired High Court judge said there might be 20 or more innocent people in prison in New Zealand.Up to 20 wrongly in jail says judge, NZ Herald, 21 January 2006. However, data released by Open Justice in 2023 found there have been nearly 900 wrongful convictions in the last ten years.900 wrongful convictions in 10 years a ‘wrecking ball’ in people’s lives, NZ Herald, 12 January 2023
But there is also no documented information describing the nature of the inquiry process used by the Ministry of Justice when considering applications for a pardon. Historically, the applicant had to provide the necessary information and make their case for the exercise of the prerogative of mercy. The Ministry would review the information, but had no power to actually investigate what happened. This meant that well-resourced applicants with access to professional assistance had a distinct advantage over those without such resources.RIS Criminal Cases ReviewCommission
Another concern is that historically, the Royal prerogative of mercy process received very few applications from Māori and Pasifika people, who are over-represented in the justice system. Between 11-16% of applications have been from Māori and Pasifika peoples, even though they make up more than 60% of the prison population. The Commission cites this statistic as part of the rationale for its establishment.
High profile miscarriages of justice Arthur Allan Thomas was one of the first miscarriage of justice cases that received significant media attention. Convicted of murder, he received a pardon in 1980 after a Royal Commission inquiry into his case found the police had planted evidence in order to secure his conviction.Report of the Royal Commission to Inquire into the Circumstances of the Convictions of Arthur Allan Thomas for the Murders of David Harvey Crewe and Jeanette Lenore Crewe David Bain spent 13 years in prison before his conviction was overturned by the Privy Council in London after a lengthy legal battle conducted on his behalf by former All Black Joe Karam.
In 1993, Peter Ellis was convicted on 16 counts of sexual offending involving children in his care at the Christchurch Civic Creche around the time of the day-care sex-abuse hysteria. In October 2022, the Supreme Court found there were problems with the evidence from the main prosecution witness, a psychiatrist, and that the jury had not been fairly informed of the risk of contamination of the children's evidence. Ellis's convictions were quashed after he had died.Norman, Cushla (October 8, 2022). "Peter Ellis case: Supreme Court quashes child abuse convictions". 1 News.
Teina Pora spent 20 years in prison for a murder he did not commit, before his conviction was overturned.Teina Pora compensation: Justice Minister Amy Adams confirms $2.52 million payout Another case is that of Alan Hall. It took 36 years, 19 of them spent in prison, before the Supreme Court of New Zealand acknowledged a substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred and overturned his conviction on 8 June 2022. Both Teina Pora and Alan Hall were subsequently diagnosed with autism, which made them vulnerable to manipulation when interrogated by police.
A more recent case where a miscarriage of justice was declared involved the convictions of Gail Maney and Stephen Stone, who were convicted of murdering Dean Fuller-Sandys. Stone was also convicted of killing Leah Stephens five days later. With no forensic evidence, the convictions were based on the testimony of four people, two of whom subsequently recanted, saying they were pressured by police to claim they were witnesses.Hutton, Catherine (2 October 2024). "Miscarriage of justice: Four quashed convictions in Fuller-Sandys murder case". NZ Herald.
Another possible case includes Shaun Allen, who was convicted of growing cannabis on his farm and has been battling for 29 years to clear his name. His farm was confiscated and he spent 18 months in prison. Others likely to make an application include Mark Lundy and Scott Watson, both of whom have protested their innocence despite spending years in prison.Justice at last: New Zealand finally launches its miscarriage of justice watchdog, The Justice Gap
The Commission has said that the need for its work also stems from concerns about the lack of independence of the previous review process, the length of time it takes for investigations to be conducted, the reluctance of appeal courts to overturn convictions and the poor quality of investigations into miscarriages of justice.
Judicial reluctance to overturn convictions
The years of legal wrangling that David Bain endured before his conviction was finally overturned after 13 years became the subject of intense media interest in New Zealand. With Joe Karam's help, he made his first application to the New Zealand Court of Appeal in 1995. In June 1998, he petitioned the Governor-General for a pardon. His case was reviewed by the Ministry of Justice, and sent back to the Court of Appeal which again turned him down. In March 2007, Bain took his case to the Privy Council in London. The Privy Council quashed his convictions and ordered a retrial. It was not until 2009 that a new trial was held and he was finally found not guilty. Judith Collins, who was Minister of Justice at the time, refused to accept that he was innocent and denied him Government compensation, even though he had spent 13 years in prison.
Until 2022, the New Zealand justice system had also repeatedly turned a blind eye to Alan Hall's imprisonment, despite extensive documentation provided to the Ministry of Justice describing what had gone wrong with his case. Nick Chisnall, the lawyer who helped persuade the Supreme Court to overturn Alan Hall's conviction, commented afterwards: "the fact it’s taken 30 years to get to this point, is an indictment on our criminal justice system. It demonstrates how hard a palpably innocent person has to work to overturn a conviction.”'It should never have happened': How everyone turned a blind eye to Alan Hall's wrongful conviction, Stuff, 19 June 2022
The reluctance of the justice system to overturn wrongful convictions led former justice Minister Andrew Little to declare that judges should not be appointed as commissioners - because judges might have adjudicated a previous case which now involved an applicant seeking to have his/her conviction overturned.Serious concerns mount over appointments to wrongful conviction body, The Post, 16 November 2024
Beginnings Former Justice Minister Andrew Little was instrumental in establishing the CCRC. In February 2020, he announced it would be established in Hamilton, adding that: "we've have some significant cases where there have been miscarriages of justice and it has taken a long time for that to be detected, for things to be put right, and ultimately for justice to be done".Justice Minister announces home for Criminal Cases Review Commission, Stuff, 21 February 2020
Hamilton was chosen to try and remove Commissioners from day-to-day contacts with the "big bureaucratic and judicial centres" of Auckland and Wellington. Hamilton barrister Roger Laybourn agreed that making the Commission separate from the justice department and the court system is important.Justice Minister announces home for Criminal Cases Review Commission, Stuff, 21 February 2020.
Powers The main function of the Commission is to receive applications, investigate and refer a conviction or sentence in a criminal case back to the appeal courts when the Commission considers a miscarriage of justice might have occurred.
The Commission has the power to develop its own procedures to ensure it can effectively carry out its duties and functions. In addition to its power of referral, the Commission has a duty to educate people and promote its work; the power to make initial inquires on its own motion; a power to conduct thematic inquiries; and the power to obtain information or exhibits from any public and private bodies it deems relevant to an inquiry.Criminal Cases Review Commission: Approval for Introduction, Chair, Cabinet Legislation Committee
Inquiry into eyewitness identification In 2024, the Commission announced it had launched an inquiry into the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence, and examine how flaws in the process have contributed to miscarriages of justice. Mike White points out that mistakes in eyewitness testimony played a part in high-profile miscarriages such as Teina Pora, Alan Hall, and David Dougherty and that controversies about eyewitness evidence featured in the appeals of Scott Watson and David Tamihere. Wrongful conviction organisation fails to deliver promised inquiry, The Post, 2 November 2025
Due to these concerns, the Commission said it would release a public consultation paper in mid-2024, leading to a final report by June 2025. Neither of these have occurred. The Commission now says it hoped to deliver a report by June 2026. A spokesperson said the Commission had decided to 'refine the scope' of the inquiry, which now would only look at 'possible improvements' to the Evidence Act relating to formal procedures for obtaining visual identification evidence by the police. Wrongful conviction organisation fails to deliver promised inquiry, The Post, 2 November 2025
Personnel