In a move that has sparked fierce backlash, the UK Ministry of Justice (MoJ) under Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government has ordered Courtsdesk, a key court reporting platform, to delete its extensive archive of magistrates’ court records covering the past five years.

The decision, announced in early February 2026, follows an alleged data breach at the company, raising concerns about data security and compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). According to the MoJ, the action is necessary to address potential risks associated with the breach and to ensure adherence to data protection standards.

However, critics have strongly condemned the move. Conservative MP Kieran Mullan and Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe have described the order as “unacceptable” and a “catastrophic blow to open justice.” They argue that the archive has played a crucial role in investigative reporting, including exposing grooming gang networks in towns such as Rotherham and Telford. Journalists and campaigners have used the records to identify patterns in convictions and highlight systemic failings.

Mullan has accused the government of using the data breach as a pretext to restrict transparency, suggesting that the deletion of records could erase evidence of institutional shortcomings in tackling child exploitation. On social media, opposition figures and members of the Conservative Party have questioned whether senior figures, including Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, are attempting to avoid scrutiny over sensitive issues such as migrant crime data or previous inquiries.

The MoJ in a desperate attempt to defends the action, insisting official court records remain fully intact and accessible, with deletions aligned strictly to retention policies.

The controversy underscores the ongoing tension between data privacy and public accountability, particularly as delays continue in the Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs. Critics argue that transparency is essential to rebuilding trust and ensuring justice for victims, while the government insists that safeguarding personal data must remain a priority.

The debate has also renewed scrutiny of Starmer’s previous role as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013, a period during which several high-profile grooming gang scandals came to light in towns including Rochdale and Rotherham. These cases involved groups of predominantly Pakistani-heritage men exploiting vulnerable young girls on a huge scale.

Critics, including whistleblower Maggie Oliver, have accused him of failing in his role by not adequately prosecuting these cases, with Oliver stating he is “perhaps as guilty as anyone” for systemic oversights that allowed abusers to evade justice, amid claims that fears of racism or political correctness hindered investigations. The issue raises broader questions about how the UK balances data protection with the imperative of transparency in confronting the legacy of grooming scandals.