The British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) has unexpectedly announced a new policy that empowers it to revoke competitive awards from future winners convicted of serious criminal offenses. The decision comes on the heels of the high-profile case of disgraced former BBC News host Huw Edwards, who pleaded guilty to three counts of making indecent images of children earlier this year.
A “Forfeiture Process” For Convicted Winners
BAFTA chair Sara Putt revealed the new “forfeiture process” in a letter to academy members this week. Starting in 2025, BAFTA’s awards rulebooks will include specific guidance on what would lead the organization to consider revoking a competitive award.
“Following the news [of Edwards’ conviction], deeply complex questions were raised regarding historic awards won by individuals and, specifically, whether awards won in competition should ever be removed retrospectively,” Putt wrote.
After careful consideration, BAFTA decided that there are indeed “exceptional grounds” for stripping awards in certain cases. The new policy will allow BAFTA to revoke a competitive award if the individual named winner is “convicted of a serious criminal offense resulting in a prison sentence.”
Putt emphasized that this will only apply to competitive awards presented from 2025 onward, not any previous winners. “We agreed it would be impossible to do this properly [retroactively],” she explained. “So we will look forward to applying this criteria to all competitive awards presented from 2025 onward.”
Honoring Creative Teams, Not Just Individuals
BAFTA’s decision to revoke awards in cases of serious criminal convictions comes with some nuance. The organization noted that its “honorary awards, such as our Fellowships, Special Awards, and Outstanding Contribution awards, can be revoked because they are gifted by the academy, which means they are not ‘won’ in competition.”
This distinction highlights BAFTA’s view that competitive awards often recognize the work of entire creative teams, not just the individual named winner. “As academy members, we ask you to judge your peers on creative excellence and vote for the best work,” Putt stated. The prize is an iconic BAFTA mask, and we know that winning a BAFTA is career-defining, sometimes even life-changing.”
A Necessary But Difficult Decision
BAFTA’s new policy is a bold and necessary step, but Putt acknowledged that it raises “deeply complex questions” without perfect solutions. “No solution is perfect, and there may be instances where the outcomes of this review are tested in the future, so we will review these principles and processes along with our other awards rules every year,” she wrote.
The Huw Edwards scandal, which revealed the serious crimes of a beloved public figure, likely influenced the decision. BAFTA faced difficult questions about whether it should revoke Edwards’ seven BAFTA Cymru awards, ultimately deciding against it.
By establishing clear guidelines for future cases, BAFTA is seeking to navigate these challenging ethical waters in a principled way. The academy is sending a strong message that it will not tolerate criminal behavior from its award winners, even if that means retroactively stripping them of their honors.
BAFTA appears committed to upholding the integrity of its prestigious awards, even though the decision will undoubtedly face scrutiny. As Putt concluded, “We are very clear that our honorary awards… can be revoked because they are gifted by the academy—which means they are not ‘won’ in competition.”
Table of Contents