| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, I take advantage of the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, looked at me and named me to ask him a question. Does he agree that if, by whatever mechanism, other countries
in common law jurisdictions are able to designate judges to deal urgently with authorisations--apparently all other common law jurisdictions that we have considered can do so--judges here will be able to act with the same urgency in dealing with this kind of authorisation as with granting ex-parte mareva or interlocutory injunctions or warrants for the inspection of bankers' books? Does the noble Lord see any reason why designated judges could not act with the same urgency and speed as in all those other ex-parte matters?
Lord Hacking: My Lords, the noble Lord is skilful. He has not only asked a question, but provided the complete answer. The answer lies in already established practices under our civil law and, indeed, under writs of habeas corpus, which goes also to our criminal law and certainly to the freedom of the individual. The answer is that judges are available 24 hours a day. Judges receive applications late into the night and, I am sure, early in the morning. I am a "doctor's wife" and am used to the telephone ringing at two o'clock in the morning. I am sure that judges would accept that form of intrusion in important cases. There would be a duty judge. I am sure that the judiciary would respond to that.
That is the important point that I wanted to make on Part III of the Bill. As I have given acknowledgement of the original authorship to the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Mostyn, I hope that the proposal will have the total support of the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, and others on the Front Benches opposite.
On Question, Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
- House adjourned at six minutes before six o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |