Service Prosecuting Authority: Independent and informed
Nine months into the job, Director of Service Prosecutions, Mary Cowe reflects on her role and the work of the Service Prosecuting Authority within the Service Justice System.
I became the Director of Service Prosecutions in October 2025, attracted to a role where I feel I can make a real difference. The Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) is small – with 48 members of staff, including 18 prosecutors – but its work has significant stature.
If the SPA is a new acronym for you, it is essentially the Armed Forces' equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) – dealing only with suspects subject to service law and service discipline.
What makes it distinct is that the SPA is part of a single deployable Service Justice System (SJS), operating at home and abroad, in peacetime and in wartime. Whether reporting an offence or being accused, Service personnel know their case will be treated in line with UK law – helping the government fulfil its obligations under international law. In some cases, we are the only means through which allegations can be tested and resolved overseas.
There is a view held by some that the SPA represents the Armed Forces 'marking its own homework'. We will always face scrutiny because the SPA is funded by the MOD and many of our prosecutors are in uniform. But we sit within the department for financial and operational reasons only. We prosecute for the Crown, just like the CPS, and our independence is well understood and respected within Defence.
I take that independence very seriously. As a civilian entirely independent from the chain of command, nobody – however senior, whether military or a Defence civil servant – can direct who or what I prosecute. I operate under the oversight of the Attorney General (the government's most senior law officer), not Defence Ministers – and my role is to ensure the SPA delivers impartial, high-quality decisions that withstand public scrutiny.
An informed approach
The work of the SPA supports operational effectiveness. Swiftly deciding whether to prosecute and bringing cases to Court Martial enables all involved – where appropriate – to return to supporting Defence, with as little time as possible spent in uncertainty.
Our prosecutors in uniform approach evidence from those who were at sea, deployed on operations, or serving in training establishments, with real-world experience of those environments.
Service context for offending often makes it more serious too, given the impact on operational effectiveness, unit cohesion, and public trust. There is a clear understanding within the SPA that protecting the reputation of our Armed Forces means identifying and prosecuting criminal behaviour – and never ignoring or downplaying it.
Speed to justice and low attrition
Specialist expertise, operational understanding and lower case volumes mean the SJS can progress cases more quickly than the civilian Criminal Justice System (CJS).
Victims of serious sexual offences in the SJS can typically expect their cases to be heard within around six months of charge. The Crown Court currently has around 80,000 outstanding cases, with some trials not listed until 2030 at the worst affected courts. The Court Martial has no backlog.
Victim withdrawals from the SJS are also very low. I believe this reflects well on the quality of support the Defence Serious Crime Command's Victim Witness Care Unit provides, with the same dedicated Victim Liaison Officer staying with each victim from start to finish. That is a level of support that independent inspectors said they would like to see available to all victims in the civilian system.
Recognised robust decision making
