Proceeding contribution from Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 10 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.
Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill
My Lords, I do not know whether the noble Lord is aware that the first problem about the European Court of Human Rights dealing with this is that most of the judges come from inquisitorial rather than accusatorial systems, yet the convention requires an accusatorial system. The second problem is that they do not regard it as within their function to dictate the detailed rules of procedure and evidence. The overriding requirement, as the Law Lords made clear and as the Bill and the Human Rights Act make clear, is to ensure a fair trial. If that is the overriding requirement, I do not think that the Liberal Democrats, the Government or the Conservative Party can be criticised for not welcoming the Bill.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 703 c881
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Common law Evidence Human rights European Convention on Human Rights House of Lords Intimidation Judgements Protection Witnesses Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-04 09:30:20 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491598
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491598
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491598