Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 June 2008. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Criminal Justice: Witness Anonymity.


Criminal Justice: Witness Anonymity

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. He is right about witness protection schemes. Given the degree of disruption a relocation or change of identity can have to the life of a witness and his or her family, it is not surprising that these programmes are offered only in the most extreme cases where there is a threat to life. That situation is likely to continue, which is why witness anonymity is important. On the question of the threshold, we will consider those matters very carefully in preparing legislation and considering what guidance will need to be issued in the future. A Court of Appeal case in the early 1990s, R v Taylor, set out the following detailed principles for the exercise of the power. There must be real grounds for a fear of the consequences if the identity of the witness were revealed. The evidence must be sufficiently important to make it unfair to make the Crown proceed without it. The Crown must satisfy the court that the creditworthiness of the witness had been fully investigated and disclosed. The court must be satisfied that there would be no undue prejudice to the accused. Finally, the court could balance the need for protecting the witness, including the extent of that protection, against unfairness or the appearance of unfairness. We shall consider all those matters.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c1608 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Appeals Convictions Common law European Convention on Human Rights House of Lords Intimidation Legislation Judgements Protection Witnesses Trials
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk