1. This guidance applies to the prosecution of all hate crime. Its purpose is to ensure that charging decisions are made swiftly and efficiently, with prosecutors focusing on the core evidence required to determine whether the evidential test is met. Where that threshold for prosecution is satisfied, then a prosecution decision should not be delayed – any supporting evidence can be obtained subsequently.

2. The guidance is issued against a background of a deeply troubling rise in antisemitic incidents across the country. These are not limited to the extreme acts of violence and criminal damage that are currently the subject of investigation and proceedings. Instead, it is evident that, as they go about their daily lives, the Jewish Community face numerous incidents which involve threats or abuse and which are intended or likely to cause distress to Jewish people. All such incidents are crimes, but only a fraction of them are referred to the CPS. Where they are, we prosecute in the great majority of cases, with a high conviction rate.

3. It is important that the Jewish Community has confidence that if these incidents are reported, action will be taken, and swiftly. We understand the wider impact one incident can have on local communities. And it is important that those who use antisemitic invective are confronted sharply with the reality that they have committed a crime and that they will be prosecuted and punished. These attacks against the Jewish community come in the context of increased incidents against minority groups.

4. In making decisions, prosecutors should consider:

• does the evidence obtained by the police go to the real issues in the case;
• does it adequately address every element of the offence;
• if outstanding information or material is required to make a prosecution decision, a swift consultation with the police should take place to establish if the issue can be resolved there and then;
• if as a result of the consultation the prosecutor is satisfied that the evidence is available, albeit not yet in a formal admissible form, a charging decision can still be made, with a record made of the outstanding action, and an action plan with an agreed, timely completion date set.
• a charging decision should only be deferred if there is a reasonable line of inquiry which must be followed because it goes to the heart of whether the case can be charged or not.

5. For example, a charging decision can be made:

• In public order cases, on the basis of the reliability and accuracy of the victim’s account, if the elements of the offence are made out, without additional supporting evidence;
• In cases where an assault has taken place, using the victim’s account of injuries, or photographs of the same, or medical records (without at that stage a doctor’s accompanying statement);
• without continuity or exhibiting statements.

6. The focus at the point of charge should be on the police providing any material which meets the disclosure test: an action plan can be set to address requirements around schedules of unused material or rebuttable presumption material.

7. In terms of the public interest test, there is a strong public interest in prosecution, and accordingly the expectation will be that a prosecution will follow where the evidential test is satisfied.

8. Bail conditions can be imposed where they are necessary to prevent the commission of further offences: Schedule 1 Part 1 Bail Act 1976. Conditions may include exclusion from certain places or areas where the risk of commission of further offences is greater.

9. At sentence, racially or religiously aggravated offending is treated more seriously by the court: sections 29-32 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and section 66 Sentencing Act 2020.

10. A Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) can be sought by the prosecution upon conviction, where:

• a defendant is convicted of an offence which involves engaging in behaviour that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to any person, and
• the court considers that making the order will help in preventing the offender from engaging in such behaviour.

11. The conditions of the order may therefore also include exclusion from certain places or areas. A CBO or other protective orders, including restraining orders, should be considered at the outset of the case.