Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lady Hermon (Ulster Unionist Party) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 13 December 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.


Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. He is absolutely right, in that I have complete confidence in the Diplock system and always have had. What we are talking about here is giving the DPP—I intend no criticism of the present incumbent—the huge discretion to decide whether or not a case goes, on his suspicion, to a non-jury trial. It would be much better if such cases were truly reviewable. In other words, if perchance the DPP went to a party at the Irish embassy and partook of too much intoxicating liquor and made a decision, it could not be challenged under the Bill that we are being asked to approve. It could be challenged only on grounds of dishonesty or bad faith. If the DPP were to be intoxicated—heaven forbid that should ever occur—or make an error of law or fact, the case in question could not be reviewed.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
454 c956 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Crime Administration of justice Armed forces Juries Intelligence services Licensing Emergency powers Intimidation Judges Private sector Northern Ireland Protection Police Powers Proscribed organisations MI5 Police Service of Northern Ireland Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission Terrorism Security Regulation Trials Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice for Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland Northern Ireland Department of the Director of Public Prosecutions Extortion Scheduled offences
Legislation
Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk