Notices of Amendments: 16th October 2007

43

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, continued

(ba)	the reference in subsection (3A) to an order specified in

subsection (3B) shall be construed as a reference to an order

under Article 5(1) of the Life Sentences (Northern Ireland) Order

2001.” ’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

84

Clause  16,  page  11,  line  38,  leave out first ‘is’ and insert ‘and the Board are’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

85

Clause  16,  page  12,  leave out lines 13 and 14.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

86

Clause  18,  page  13,  line  22,  after ‘may,’, insert ‘with the approval of the Lord

Chief Justice or a judge designated by him,’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

87

Clause  19,  page  14,  line  29,  at end add—

‘(10)

For the avoidance of doubt there is a rebuttable presumption that any prisoner of

a category referred to in section 46ZA will be removed from the United Kingdom

following his release without prejudice to any existing rights not to be, or

protections from being, removed under British or European Union law.’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

88

Clause  20,  page  15,  line  28,  at end add—

‘(9)	For the avoidance of doubt there is a rebuttable presumption that any prisoner of

a category referred to in section 259A will be removed from the United Kingdom

following his release without prejudice to any existing rights not to be, or

protections from being, removed under British or European Union law.’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

89

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  24,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘50’.

Notices of Amendments: 16th October 2007

44

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, continued

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

90

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  24,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘45’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

91

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  24,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘35’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

92

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  24,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘30’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

93

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  24,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘25’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

94

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  32,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘50’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

95

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  32,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘45’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

96

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  32,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘35’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

97

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  32,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘30’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

98

Clause  22,  page  16,  line  32,  leave out ‘20’ and insert ‘25’.

Notices of Amendments: 16th October 2007

45

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, continued

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

99

Page  19,  line  18,  leave out Clause 26

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

100

Clause  26,  page  19,  line  23,  at end insert ‘and they have a certificate from the trial

judge confirming that the evidence heard by him and the jury was sufficient to prove the

prosecution case and that he had admitted and the jury had considered, and been directed

by him in relation to, the relevance of any evidence of the procedural or other

misconduct.’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

101

Clause  26,  page  20,  leave out line 6 and insert ‘may, as the Court think fit in the

interests of justice in that case, either direct that there be a retrial or that the appellant be

acquitted.’.

Mr Edward Garnier

Mr David Burrowes

Mr Nick Hurd

102

Clause  26,  page  20,  line  6,  at end add ‘, who must initiate or not initiate such

criminal or civil proceedings (or both) as he thinks best suit the justice of the case (taking

into account the impact on the victim of the offence or his family of his decision either to

proceed or not) and which decision either to proceed or not will provide the most suitable

redress to the subject of such misconduct, deter any such misconduct in the future and

restore public confidence in the criminal justice system.’.

---

Revised 17 October 2007