Existing discourses on miscarriages of justice in England and Wales have not included all successful appeals against criminal conviction. They have been defined almost solely in terms of exceptional cases of successful appeal against a criminal conviction that failed upon first appeal and were then overturned through special post-appeal mechanisms that are currently the responsibility of the Criminal Cases Review Commission. These discourses have emphasized the reform of the criminal justice system to reduce the future occurrence of miscarriages of justice. Such a strategy gives no credit to the current system for the appeals that are routinely successful without special interventions. Further, the view that a successful appeal exposes a wrongful conviction fails to recognize that appeals may involve legal technicalities rather than issues of innocence or guilt. Given the identified flaws in current discourse on the nature of a "miscarriage of justice," this article constructs an alternative discourse and argues for the inclusion of all successful appeals against criminal conviction, from whichever appeals court they derive. This article argues for basing discourses on miscarriages of justice in the human right to receive a fair and impartial consideration of guilt or innocence in accordance with specified legal procedures. Where legal procedures have not been correctly followed or access to the correction of such failures is impaired, then miscarriages of justice occur, regardless of the issue of guilt or innocence. 75 references