| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Deregulation
31. Mr. Flynn: To ask the Attorney-General what plans he has for further deregulation proposals within his office. [9939]
The Solicitor-General (Sir Derek Spencer): The Departments for which the Attorney-General is responsible have no regulatory functions to which the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994 applies. However, the Crown Prosecution Service continues to work with the police to reduce paperwork and administrative burdens in the prosecution of crime.
Mr. Flynn: Rational deregulation is to be welcomed, but has not the ideologically inspired deregulation of the Crown Prosecution Service left it in a sad position? Morale is at rock bottom and public confidence is at a low ebb. The CPS is thought to pursue trivial offenders when it has a strong case, whereas serious offenders are allowed to run free if the case is weaker. Is not the result of the CPS's conviction-at-all-costs policy that trivial offenders are convicted, whereas many serious offenders get away with it?
The Solicitor-General: The hon. Gentleman's criticisms are entirely misplaced. He talks about morale, but if he and certain of his hon. Friends visited the CPS more often and looked at what it does, they would launch into ill-judged criticism less frequently. The best way in which to help the CPS with morale is to stop criticising it unfairly.
Mr. John Marshall: May I ask my right hon. and learned Friend not to remove the obligation from the Crown Prosecution Service and the prosecuting authorities to prosecute cases under the War Crimes Act 1991 if there is adequate evidence?
The Solicitor-General: I appeared in front of Mr. Justice Potts in Sheffield for three days between 17 and 19 December. He heard arguments that the case amounted to an abuse of process, in part based on the lapse of time since the events took place. After he had heard all the arguments, he concluded that there was no abuse of process and that the case was fit to proceed. The case came to an end last week only because a jury found that the defendant's mental state, which had declined rapidly in the past six months, did not allow him to be tried. The principle, however, is plain: if there is
20 Jan 1997 : Column 617
evidence--and there was in that case--and if the defendant is fit to be tried, we will prosecute firmly and resolutely.Public Interest Immunity Certificates
32. Mr. Cohen: To ask the Attorney-General when he expects to announce the results of his review of public interest immunity certificates. [9940]
The Attorney-General: I made a statement to the House on the Government's new approach to public interest immunity on 18 December 1996. A paper setting out the Government's conclusions was placed in the Library.
Mr. Cohen: Does not the announced reform of the public interest immunity certificate system amount to a success for Lord Justice Scott? Would not the Government still have used it, even under the new system, to thwart justice in the Matrix Churchill case? Is the Attorney-General able to confirm that the blanket ban will go, and that real harm and damage to the public interest will have to be proved to a judge in every case? Will not that new system still facilitate cover-ups, especially in cases involving breaches of arms embargoes, the Prison Service and the police?
The Attorney-General: On the hon. Gentleman's last point, I emphasise very strongly that there were no cover-ups through public interest immunity certificates in the Matrix Churchill case. It is about time that he realised that.
We consulted widely and paid great attention to the advice of Sir Richard Scott and the many others who responded. As I told the House on 18 December, the new test--that a certificate will be issued only if the documents or information in question, if disclosed, would be likely to cause real harm or real damage--was recommended by the Lord Chief Justice and adopted by the Government.
As I also told the House, many of the problems were put aside when the House of Lords, in the case of ex parte Wiley in 1994--two years after the Matrix Churchill case--changed the system and gave Ministers much more discretion. The hon. Gentleman will want to have those three important points well in mind.
Mr. Clifton-Brown:
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the problem with the Matrix Churchill
20 Jan 1997 : Column 618
The Attorney-General:
Yes, my hon. Friend is right that one of the reasons for such wide misconceptions about the use of certificates in the Matrix Churchill case was that Ministers had little discretion and it was necessary to have more certificates than would now be the case. My hon. Friend will also realise that the matter was distorted out of proportion. Those who have followed it carefully will realise that.
33. Mr. Thurnham:
To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the current success rate of the Crown Prosecution Service in the north-west. [9941]
The Solicitor-General:
The north-west area of the Crown Prosecution Service makes a strong contribution to the overall success of the service. The number and proportion of cases discontinued has been reduced to below the national average and conviction rates in the magistrates and Crown courts are 98.5 per cent. and 91.6 per cent. respectively.
Mr. Thurnham:
What are the Law Officers doing to increase the number of convictions of child sex offenders, in view of the low conviction rates, which are currently estimated at below 5 per cent., and mounting public concern about scandals in child care homes in the north-west?
The Solicitor-General:
The law has been changed a number of times in recent years. Normally, a child complainant in such a case will make the original complaint to a social worker, and it will be recorded on video tape. At the hearing, that video tape will stand as the child's evidence-in-chief and cross-examination will be by means of a live video link, with the child in a separate room. The methods that we now adopt in the courts to try to get at the truth in paedophile cases are a great advance on the methods that were in use 10 or 15 years ago.
20 Jan 1997 : Column 617
20 Jan 1997 : Column 619
Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Bill
The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
The new clause would introduce a minor but welcome change to the procedure for handling the list of assize, which gives details concerning the jurors who are to be empanelled in a trial. We think that in a small way the new clause would contribute towards making it more difficult to threaten or intimidate jurors and it is therefore welcome.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.
20 Jan 1997 : Column 620
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
'.--(1) After section 67 of the 1995 Act, there shall be inserted the following section--
"Failure of witness to attend for, or give evidence on, precognition
67A.--(1) This section applies where a prosecutor has obtained a warrant to cite a witness for precognition and has served a citation for precognition on the witness.
(2) Where this section applies, a witness who--
(a) fails without reasonable excuse, after receiving at least 48 hours notice, to attend for precognition by a prosecutor at the time and place mentioned in the citation served on him; or
(b) refuses when so cited to give information within his knowledge regarding any matter relative to the commission of the offence in relation to which such precognition is taken,
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 21 days.".
(2) In section 140 of the 1995 Act (citation)--
(a) in subsection (1), after the words "for" there shall be inserted the words "--
(a) the citation of witnesses for precognition by the prosecutor, whether or not any person has been charged with the offence in relation to which the precognition is taken; and
(b)"; and
(b) subsection (3) shall cease to have effect.'.--[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |