---

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I will be very brief. I would like the Minister to deal with four points when he responds. First, why has such a huge volume of new clauses and proposals been put before the House? They have not been debated in Committee and, because of the timetabling, they are subject to extremely curtailed debate in this place. Secondly, treaty obligations, which I mentioned in an intervention on the hon. and learned Member for Harborough (Mr. Garnier), concern me greatly. When the previous Prime Minister exchanged a series of letters with several countries in the middle east and north Africa to allow terrorist suspects to be sent back to them, it undermined, in my view, the principle behind international treaty obligations, especially the treaty on torture. I should therefore like the Minister to assure the House that nothing in the amendments would continue that practice. I hope that the Government's policy will be, in future, to return prisoners only to countries that are, like us, signatories to international conventions on basic human rights, such as those on torture and people's treatment. Thirdly, the hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) made an important point about reciprocity. Many of us have constituents who have unfortunately been arrested, charged and convicted abroad and are serving sentences abroad. Many of us have made representations to try to get those prisoners returned to this country to complete their sentences here. I wholly support that process. I, like, I imagine, many other hon. Members, have made representations on behalf of constituents in that position so that they can return and get the family support and rehabilitation that is necessary before release. I am worried that we might send prisoners to another jurisdiction where prison conditions are far worse than those in this country, where they could be subject to ill treatment, which they would not receive here, and where they may not have anything like similar rights. I would therefore be happier if we sent prisoners only to countries where there was a reciprocal agreement. In many cases, there is no reciprocal agreement. I would have thought that the principle should be to encourage reciprocity between jurisdictions, which would ensure at least some equality of standards. The hon. Member for Cambridge also made a point about the lack of an appeal against decisions. Surely it is basic natural justice that, if somebody who has been convicted of an offence and sentenced to prison in this country, where the sentence is passed, is then to be removed to another jurisdiction, where they may be subject to charges that would not apply in an English or British court, they should at least have an opportunity to appeal against the decision. I repeat that I am concerned that so many new clauses, which would make serious procedural changes, are suddenly dumped on us, with no scrutiny in Committee. The only people who will get a chance to examine them are their lordships. We will consider them only if the Lords decides to amend the measure and it returns. That is an unsatisfactory way of undertaking major legislative changes that may affect many people's rights.