PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE RELATING
TO THE REPORT
THURSDAY
28 NOVEMBER 2002
Members present:
Mr Chris Mullin, in the Chair
| Mr David Cameron | Mr Gwyn Prosser
|
| Mr James Clappison | Bob Russell
|
| Mrs Janet Dean | David Winnick
|
| Bridget Prentice | |
***
Draft Report [Criminal Justice Bill] proposed by the Chairman,
brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph
by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 88 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 89 read, as follows:
"We accept that there may be cogent reasons for dispensing—in
some cases—with a jury in a complex financial case. In particular,
the length of these cases can place a highly significant burden
on the jury which, in turn, may reduce dramatically the pool of
jurors available. This (arguably) undermines the principle of
random selection on which our jury system is based."
Amendment proposed, to leave out the paragraph and insert the
words:
"We do not accept that a convincing case has been
made for removing the right of trial by jury from defendants in
complex fraud or financial cases. The requirements of justice
should come first; practicalities are important, but secondary
issues. In complex cases it must be for the defence, prosecution
and judge to crystallise and clarify the issues for the jury.
Judge only trials would become complex and technical; justice
would not been seen to be done and defendants could be convicted
at the end of proceedings that neither they nor the public had
fully understood. A clear statement from this Committee that the
right to trial by jury should be retained may encourage Governments
to cease attempts to undermine the jury system."—(Mr
David Cameron.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 3 | Noes, 4 |
| |
| Mr David Cameron | Mrs Janet Dean
|
| Mr James Clappison | Bridget Prentice
|
| Bob Russell | Mr Gwyn Prosser
|
| David Winnick |
Paragraph amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 90 to 136 read and agreed to.
Paragraphs 137 and 138 read, as follows:
"Clause 139 will give power to the Home Secretary to
increase further magistrates' sentencing powers to impose imprisonment
for any one offence to 18 months, and to increase the limit on
consecutive sentence to 24 months. Liberty have described this
as "wholly unacceptable". In the light of the statistics,
provided by professor Lee Bridges, we are inclined to agree.
We recommend that a further increase of magistrates'
sentencing powers to 18 months would only serve to exacerbate
the problem of prison overcrowding. We recommend, therefore, that
Clause 139 be deleted from the Bill."
Motion made, and Question put, That Paragraphs 137 and 138 be
left out.—(Bridget Prentice.)
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 5 | Noes, 2 |
| |
| Mr David Cameron | Bob Russell
|
| Mr James Clappison | David Winnick
|
| Mrs Janet Dean | |
| Bridget Prentice | |
| Mr Gwyn Prosser | |
Paragraphs disagreed to.
Paragraphs 139 to 149 (now Paragraphs 137 to 148) read and agreed
to.
Annex agreed to.
Summary agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report, as amended, be the Second Report
of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chairman do make the Report to the House.
Several Papers were ordered to be appended to the Minutes of Evidence.
Ordered, That the Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence
be reported to the House.—(The Chairman.)
[Adjourned till Tuesday 3 December at quarter
past Ten o'clock.
| 
