Author: Adrian Ramdat (Director of Training & Consultancy)
November 2025
No one becomes an investigator to see their cases collapse in court. Yet too often, that’s exactly what happens, not because the evidence is weak but because of avoidable disclosure failures.
In the 2023/24 financial year, more than 4,000 prosecutions were abandoned or dropped where disclosure played a role, almost a thousand more than the previous year. It’s a trend no investigator can afford to ignore.
Disclosure is not a paperwork exercise. It’s a core part of building a resilient case. When done well, it protects the integrity of the investigation and the fairness of the trial. When done badly, it risks wasting years of work, undermining public confidence and worst of all, contributing to miscarriages of justice.
This article explores why disclosure still trips up so many investigations, what’s changing in law and practice, and how investigators across all organisations can close the knowledge gap.
The Legal Framework and Its Purpose
Disclosure is one of the most fundamental and most misunderstood elements of our criminal justice system. Under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA), supported by the Attorney General’s Guidelines and the CPIA Code of Practice, proper disclosure is vital to ensuring fair trials. Yet serious failings continue to undermine prosecutions and erode public trust.
As Nigel Sweeney KC observed, there remains “a litany of examples of failures in the system, a comprehensive failure on the part of police officers, prosecuting counsel and judges to understand the principles of disclosure.”
It’s a sobering reminder that disclosure failures are rarely confined to one part of the system. When a case collapses, it is not simply the result of a single oversight, it reflects a breakdown across the investigative, prosecutorial and judicial chain. Investigators may fail to recognise or record relevant material; prosecutors may not test or challenge the adequacy of the schedules; and courts may proceed without fully probing whether disclosure has been properly managed.
This isn’t about apportioning blame, but about recognising that disclosure is a shared professional responsibility. Every stage of the process, from the first entry on a case log to the final pre-trial review, depends on each party understanding their role and acting with the same commitment to fairness and transparency. Without that collective diligence, the entire justice process is at risk.
This is not about tactical gamesmanship between prosecution and defence. It’s about upholding an absolute legal right: the right to a fair trial. Failing to meet disclosure obligations can, and does, result in miscarriages of justice.
Why Disclosure Matters
At its core, the principle is simple: prosecutors must share any material that could reasonably undermine their case or assist the defence. The CPIA framework provides a clear process for doing so, from the earliest stages of an investigation through to trial and appeal.
Yet too often, disclosure is treated as an afterthought, seen by some as a bureaucratic burden rather than a vital safeguard.
Modern investigations only amplify the challenge. The sheer volume of digital material makes it harder to assess relevance, categorise correctly, and apply the disclosure test consistently.
Common Pitfalls and Cultural Challenges
Systemic problems with disclosure have long been recognised, and while guidance has evolved, practice on the ground remains inconsistent. A joint inspection of disclosure in Crown Court cases (though published a few years ago) highlighted cultural issues that still persist.
A key finding was an overly narrow view of relevance. Too often, officers focus only on material they believe is directly impactful, rather than taking the broader approach required under the CPIA. Working practices and supervision models can reinforce this limited view.
The introduction of the rebuttable presumption in favour of disclosure for certain categories of unused material is a welcome development but it will only improve outcomes if investigators understand it, apply it properly, and defence lawyers are confident enough to challenge reasoning for non-disclosure.
Disclosure is not a box-ticking exercise. It requires professional judgment, continuous engagement, and collaboration throughout the life of a case.
One of the most common failings remains poor completion of disclosure schedules, often lacking the detail prosecutors need to make informed decisions about the material. That gap in quality and understanding has real consequences in court.
Bridging the Knowledge Gap
Unfortunately, gaps in understanding remain widespread. Disclosure obligations extend beyond investigators and disclosure officers, they apply equally to intelligence staff, analysts, researchers, covert operatives and prosecutors. Inconsistent knowledge and practice across these groups continue to cause significant problems.
In recent training sessions I’ve delivered to investigators and intelligence professionals, many participants admitted a lack of confidence and clarity in this area. One attendee told me they hadn’t received any formal training on disclosure since 2004, a single example but a stark illustration of a systemic issue.
Misunderstanding disclosure obligations doesn’t just risk case collapse, it undermines public confidence and can lead to wrongful convictions, with devastating personal consequences. The headlines, sadly, still prove that point far too often.
Regular, high-quality training and continuing professional development (CPD) are essential to raising standards. Practitioners at every level must stay up to date, not only with the law and guidance, but with how disclosure is applied in real-world investigations.
Conclusion
Disclosure is not an optional extra. It sits at the heart of a fair and effective justice process.
The growing number of prosecutions derailed by disclosure failures shows that there is still much to do. Everyone in the system, investigators, prosecutors and defence lawyers alike, has a part to play in getting it right.
At The Signature Brand Training & Consultancy Ltd, we deliver practical disclosure training for investigators, intelligence professionals, and prosecutors, from basic awareness through to advanced and specialist disclosure. We also offer our excellent bite sized events that focus on a specific area and are useful for CPD.
If your team hasn’t had recent or refresher training on disclosure, it’s time to act.
Don’t wait until a case collapses. Invest in your team’s competence, confidence, and compliance today.
Contact us to discuss initial, refresher, or bite sized disclosure training that strengthens your cases and protects your reputation. Call us on 0203 883 5843 or email us at info@thesignaturebrand.co.uk