Examination of Witnesses (Questions 936
- 939)
TUESDAY 6 MARCH 2001 (Morning sitting)
MR BARRY
MILLER AND
BRIGADIER NICK
COTTAM
Chairman
936. Can I say good morning to you all and a
particular good morning and welcome to yourself, Mr Miller, and
yourself, Brigadier Cottam. I would like to thank you very much
for both the oral and the written evidence that you have given
to this Committee so far, which we have found very useful indeed
in our considerations. We are very pleased to have the opportunity
to follow up on some of the issues that have been raised during
our evidence sessions, not only with yourselves but with others
who have given evidence to the Committee. So thank you very much
indeed for, once again, coming along this morning. We want to
begin by looking further at the legal representation available
for Service personnel and the first particular issue is the availability
of Legal Aid for Service personnel in the United Kingdom. Before
I call on the first Committee Member, are there any points that
you, either yourself, Mr Miller, or yourself, Brigadier Cottam,
would wish to make?
(Mr Miller) I do not think so, thank
you, Madam Chairman. It is probably best if we attempt to deal
with the questions.
Chairman: In that case, can I call on
Mr Key to open up with some questions?
Mr Key
937. Good morning, Mr Miller. Can I, first,
thank you very much and your colleagues for sending the note to
the Committee which is tabled as AFB29 and is dated 1 March.[1]
That is the clarification which you have given, for example, on
Legal Aid for Service personnel prior to charge. Can I say how
delighted that I am and, I suspect, the whole Committee is, with
the very good response that you have given us here and the conclusions
in paragraph 9 that new Legal Aid arrangements will be introduced
as part of the Criminal Defence Service Arrangements by the Legal
Services Commission in April. That, I think, is a great step forward
and I think a lot of people will be very glad that the Ministry
of Defence has been so positive in its response. It does, however,
leave one or two questions which still have to be put. May I also
say that I think the establishment of the new body which I was
told about only quite recently, the Office of Standards of Casework
(Army), is also going to be an extremely good innovation, and
I congratulate the Ministry of Defence on that too. I think that
is going to help a lot of people. However, I still have some problems
over the timing of all this. I wonder if you could explain what
is the reason for withholding Legal Aid until the Service prosecuting
authorities are certain that the prosecution will take place?
Is this is a question of not wishing to spend public money on
a case which will not proceed, or is there some other reason?
It still seems to me that there is a disadvantage to someone in
the Services who has been charged compared to a civilian, simply
from the point of view of that long delay during which time, in
the civilian circumstance, a defence could be worked on.
(Mr Miller) That gap arises simply because
policy at the moment is, so far as possible, to mirror the arrangements
under civil Legal Aid. It was not until I saw the transcript of
the evidence from Forces Law (I think they call themselves) that
I was conscious that there were any particular problems as a result
of that. We will look further into that, because clearly if a
twelve-month delay—which I think was the figure that was
quoted on that occasion—is at all common, then we do need
to rethink what we are doing. Clearly, it will take some time
to weigh it up properly because there is an issue of public money
here; I do not particularly want to spend public money enabling
solicitors to prepare defences for cases which will not actually
come to court. Indeed, I suspect that most solicitors, even if
they are paid for it, would still rather not waste their time
in that way.
938. What legal assistance is available to a
Service person tried at Court Martial in Germany, and what costs
are they required to meet themselves? Has there been any change
in recent years?
(Mr Miller) Until, I think it was, April last year
they were entitled to civil Legal Aid, so if they employed a civilian
lawyer that would be paid for. Last year the civil Legal Aid scheme
ceased to operate abroad, so at the moment if a serviceman wants
a civilian lawyer as opposed to a Service lawyer he will have
to pay for it, but that will end next month when under the new
scheme he will again be eligible for civilian Legal Aid.[2]
939. That falls under the circumstances that
have been described earlier. That is good news. Can I ask about
the Royal Navy, in particular? In the vast majority of serious
cases a seaman will be repatriated. In those circumstances do
they have a choice of a civilian solicitor or a Service representative?
(Mr Miller) When they come back to the United Kingdom,
yes.
1 See Appendix 18. Back
2
Note by witness: In fact, there has been no interruption
in the availability of civilian legal representation under the
Services' legal aid schemes for personnel facing court-martial
either in the United Kingdom or overseas. The changes in the civilian
legal aid arrangements introduced in December 1999 for individuals
overseas only affected, as far as Service personnel are concerned,
these few cases where they wished to be advised in person by a
United Kingdom-based civilian lawyer at a police interview, prior
to charge. Back
|
