---

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill

I am grateful to the Attorney-General. As she knows, at Second Reading I gave pretty broad support, as has the Joint Committee on Human Rights, to the Bill. I have this puzzlement, which is probably capable of being dealt with now. If we get this wrong and there are lots of mistrials and then a lot of applications under the Human Rights Act, we will have failed rather seriously. The principle of legal certainty means that the rules must be made and the guidance given to the trial judge in all the pending cases that have been stayed. We know that the rule committee acts swiftly, but I do not understand how any cases can go forward until the rules have been prescribed, in order that there is reasonable legal certainty and that the poor old trial judge will understand procedurally what she or he is to do. Therefore, what is to happen, given that it is clear from what the Attorney-General has told us that the draft rules are not ready for us to consider? What is to happen during the hiatus when no rules have been made and there are those pending cases? That is part of the concern of the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford, in his question. It seems to me to be not theoretical but urgent practically that we know exactly what will happen about the rules and what is to happen to the pending cases. Otherwise, we are into the territory not only of equality of arms, which has been raised by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, but the principle of legal certainty. The principle of legal certainty, as the noble and learned Baroness knows, is especially important in criminal justice. Can we get some clarification of that now?