Draft Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026

The Committee consisted of the following Members:

Chair: Pete Wishart

† Athwal, Jas (Ilford South) (Lab)

† Bool, Sarah (South Northamptonshire) (Con)

Brown Fuller, Jess (Chichester) (LD)

Dixon, Anna (Shipley) (Lab)

Foody, Emma (Cramlington and Killingworth) (Lab/Co op)

† Jones, Sarah (Minister for Policing and Crime)

† Kearns, Alicia (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)

† Lam, Katie (Weald of Kent) (Con)

† McIntyre, Alex (Gloucester) (Lab)

Maguire, Ben (North Cornwall) (LD)

† Mayer, Alex (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)

Midgley, Anneliese (Knowsley) (Lab)

† Mishra, Navendu (Stockport) (Lab)

† Robertson, Dave (Lichfield) (Lab)

† Taylor, David (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)

† Thompson, Adam (Erewash) (Lab)

Williamson, Sir Gavin (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)

Tom Bailey, Anne Marie Griffiths, Committee Clerks

† attended the Committee

The following also attended, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(2):

Botterill, Jade (Lord Commissioner of His Majesty’s Treasury)

Law, Noah (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)

Ninth Delegated Legislation Committee

Wednesday 1 July 2026

[Pete Wishart in the Chair]

Draft Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026

I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. The draft order seeks to amend the definition of “ninja sword” in the list of prohibited offensive weapons by amending the definition contained in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. I will briefly set out the context.

The existing legislation, which bans ninja swords, followed a manifesto commitment to respond to the tireless campaigning by the family of Ronan Kanda, who was just 16 when he was fatally stabbed in 2022 by a person using a ninja sword. In 2024, the Government ran a public consultation on the proposed definition of a ninja sword in order to ban the weapons, in line with our aim to halve knife crime within a decade. The consultation sought views from the public and interested stakeholders on a draft definition of a ninja sword.

Ninja swords are defined as a bladed article with a blade between 14 inches and 24 inches in length, with one straight cutting edge and a tanto style point. That length was chosen in order to exclude knives and tools designed for legitimate purposes, such as many kitchen knives and other types of knives. In order to be within scope of the ban, the article should also have the features described in paragraph 1(u) of the schedule to the 1988 order, namely: a “primary…cutting edge”, a “secondary…cutting edge” and a “blunt spine”, with either a “tanto style point” or a “reversed tanto style point”. Those terms are further defined in the detail of the legislation. We introduced legislation following analysis of the consultation responses, and ninja swords became prohibited from 1 August 2025.

However, the Government recently became aware that the wording of the legislation does not correctly describe the length of the secondary straight cutting edge of a ninja sword, as was intended. The draft order therefore seeks to rectify that and align the legislation with the original intention. To be clear, this amendment is a technical clarification to existing secondary legislation banning ninja swords. Although the amendment to the definition widens the scope of the existing wording, it does not introduce new offences, bring any ninja swords out of scope, or impose additional requirements on the public.

Under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, it is an offence to possess, import, manufacture, sell, hire, offer for sale or hire, expose or possess for the purposes of sale or hire a weapon specified in an order made under that section. The legislation contains a detailed description of the tanto style or reversed tanto style point of the sword. The legislation states that “a secondary straight cutting edge is a cutting edge…which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and…is no more than 5% longer or shorter than the width of the blade immediately after the handle.”

The reference to the 5% is incorrect and limits the scope of what size of tip falls under the legislation.

We therefore propose to use the order making powers under section 141(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to amend the definition to: “a secondary straight cutting edge is a cutting edge…which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and…is no more than 105% longer than the width of the blade immediately after the handle.”

That correction will allow the legislation to function as intended and remove any ambiguity about which swords fall within scope of the definition. We have also included an additional diagram in the explanatory note to make the definition easier to understand—it certainly helped me, and it may be useful for Members.

To conclude, the Government are determined to stop dangerous weapons getting into the wrong hands, and this clarification will assist the police in exercising their powers to prevent violence and keep the public safe. I commend the draft order to the Committee.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart.

Far too many lives are still being tragically cut short by offences involving knives and other bladed weapons. I pay tribute to the family of Ronan Kanda, who fought so bravely after their son’s future was stolen by thugs who used fake ID to order a zombie knife off the internet, collected it from the post office that same day, and then brutally murdered him. His family have campaigned tirelessly in his memory to secure stronger laws, and they deserve enormous credit for their determination.

It was for precisely those reasons and those horrors that the previous Conservative Government introduced legislation to ban zombie knives and machetes, building on our 2016 ban, and banned cyclone knives in 2019. Those are incredibly dangerous weapons, and there is no legitimate reason for them to be available for purchase. However, it is frustrating that must reopen this legislation because the Government did not get it right first time and proceeded with an error in the previous instrument. As the Minister set out, the instrument used the figure of 5% in relation to the secondary cutting edge, when it should have been 105%.

That is frustrating, not least because the Conservatives raised that exact question in Committee in the House of Commons and in the Lords. We said that the drafting was overly narrow and would not catch the weapons that it needed to. We were dismissed in the House of Lords and in the Commons. The Minister in the Lords went so far as to state that “the order before the Committee is very specific and tightly defined.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 5 June 2025; Vol. 846, c. GC112.] Against that backdrop, can the Minister confirm that the wording before the Committee is now correct, and will she set out what impact, if any, the previous drafting error had in practice? Will we move forward and work together to keep dangerous knives and weapons off our streets? We must protect our children and save lives.

I associate myself with the hon. Lady’s remarks about Ronan Kanda’s family and their tireless campaigning. We are very grateful to Ronan’s mother and sister for being part of our coalition to tackle knife crime. They give their time freely and generously, and we spend lots of time listening to what they have to say. They are pushing us, as they should, to go further in tackling knife crime. Their work has led us to consulting on a licence regime for knife sales—we are working through that at the moment—and they keep pushing us to do more. We have had some success, with a 10% fall in knife crime and a 27% fall in knife murders, but we have a long way to go.

To reassure the hon. Lady, we understand there have been no cases in which the legislation has impacted on any outcome. We have talked to the police about it and sought to rectify the error that was made as soon as we could. In no case has somebody not ended up going to court because of this problem. We are right to fix it as soon as discovering it, and that is what we are doing. I hope that the Committee is reassured that we are doing the right thing as quickly as we can, and that we will continue to bear down on knife crime.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee rose.