Draft:JENGbA
Submission declined on 27 April 2026 by PARAKANYAA (talk).
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
|  |
Comment: In accordance with Wikipedia's Conflict of interest guideline, I disclose that I have a conflict of interest regarding the subject of this article. ~2026-24751-38 (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
 | This article may incorporate text from a large language model, which is prohibited in Wikipedia articles. (April 2026) |
JENGbA (Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association) is a grassroots not-for-profit campaign group based in the United Kingdom. It was founded in 2010 to challenge the use of the joint enterprise doctrine in the English and Welsh criminal justice system, and to support individuals who believe they have been wrongfully convicted under it.
Background
[edit]Joint enterprise is a common law doctrine in England and Wales that allows more than one person to be prosecuted for the same offence, including cases where a secondary party did not directly carry out the crime. Critics argue that the doctrine has historically been applied too broadly, resulting in convictions of individuals based on association or "foresight" rather than direct participation.
Founding
[edit]JENGbA was launched in 2010 by a group of family members who believed their loved ones had been wrongfully convicted under joint enterprise laws.[1] The co-founders include Gloria Morrison and Janet Cunliffe. Janet Cunliffe's son Jordan was convicted of murder under joint enterprise at the age of 16 in connection with the death of Gary Newlove.[2]
Aims and Activities
[edit]JENGbA is run entirely by volunteers and does not offer legal advice. Its stated aims are to:
- Support prisoners, and their families and friends, who believe they have been wrongfully convicted under joint enterprise
- Campaign for reform of the joint enterprise doctrine
- Raise public awareness of the perceived injustices caused by the law
The organisation has described itself as a support group rather than an innocence project, meaning it advocates for reform and supports those affected rather than adjudicating on individual guilt or innocence.[3]
R v Jogee (2016)
[edit]JENGbA played a significant role in bringing about the landmark Supreme Court ruling in R v Jogee [2016] UKSC 8. In 2015, campaigners crowdfunded to enable three lawyers to intervene in the Supreme Court's review of the joint enterprise doctrine.[4]
In February 2016, the Supreme Court ruled that the law had taken a "wrong turn" since the 1984 case of Chan Wing-Siu v The Queen, finding that the doctrine of parasitic accessory liability had been misapplied for over 30 years. The court replaced it with a requirement for prosecutors to prove intention, rather than mere foresight.[5]
However, subsequent appeals faced a high bar: the Court of Appeal required applicants to demonstrate "substantial injustice", which JENGbA and others criticised as too restrictive to provide adequate remedy for those wrongfully convicted.
Racial Disparity and Legal Action
[edit]Research has indicated that joint enterprise prosecutions disproportionately affect people from Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, particularly young Black men.[6]
In 2023, following a legal challenge brought by JENGbA and represented by Liberty, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) agreed to a pilot scheme to monitor and record the age, race, sex and disability of those prosecuted under the joint enterprise doctrine. The CPS also agreed to record when such prosecutions are presented as gang-related cases.[7]
Parliamentary Campaigning
[edit]JENGbA has engaged in parliamentary advocacy over many years. In September 2022, a Private Members' Bill sponsored by MP Barry Sheerman, and supported by twelve cross-party MPs, was tabled to remove the "substantial injustice" test that restricts appeals following the Jogee ruling.[8]
JENGbA has also given evidence to the Westminster Commission on Joint Enterprise, and MP Kim Johnson raised the issue in Parliament in February 2026 as the tenth anniversary of the Jogee ruling approached.[9]
Recognition
[edit]In 2025, co-founder Jan Cunliffe was named among the Big Issue's Top 100 Changemakers.[10]
JENGbA contributed to the podcast In It Together: The Joint Enterprise Podcast, a four-part series hosted by actress Maxine Peake, exploring the human impact of joint enterprise law.
See Also
[edit]References
[edit]- ↑ "Written evidence from JENGbA". UK Parliament. Retrieved 2019-06-05.
- ↑ "JENGbA: Campaigning against the doctrine of 'joint enterprise'". Oxford Centre for Criminology. 2019-06-05. Retrieved 2019-06-05.
- ↑ "JENGbA – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association". Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- ↑ "JENGbA: Campaigning against the doctrine of 'joint enterprise'". Oxford Centre for Criminology. 2019-06-05. Retrieved 2019-06-05.
- ↑ "JENGbA – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association". Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- ↑ "Joint Enterprise: Not Guilty by Association". Baring Foundation. 2022-10-24. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- ↑ "Legal win for campaigners in 'racist' joint enterprise dispute". Liberty. 2023-08-17. Retrieved 2023-08-17.
- ↑ "Joint Enterprise: Not Guilty by Association". Baring Foundation. 2022-10-24. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- ↑ "JENGbA – Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association". Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- ↑ "Jan Cunliffe – Sounddelivery Media". Retrieved 2024-01-01.
- provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, excluding routine coverage like product launches, staff appointments, or financial reports and listings in databases or listicles;
- are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
- are independent: not connected to the subject, such as press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.
Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.