---

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill

I have a point to make that is quite apposite to the matter before the House. The Treasury Solicitor’s A Guide to the Role of Special Advocates and the Special Advocates Support Office sets out the statutory and other bases for the use of special advocates. It says: "““The House of Lords in R -v- H and C [2004] UKHL 3, [2004] 2 AC 134 held that 'special counsel' (in effect a Special Advocate) might exceptionally be appointed in a criminal case. The House held however that such an appointment will always be exceptional, never automatic; a course of last and never first ""resort; and should not be ordered unless and until the trial judge is satisfied that no other course will adequately meet the overriding requirement of fairness to the defendant””." There is some dubiety about the role of special advocate—I pointed out at Second Reading the passage in Archbold in which the learned editor says that this discretion should be used sparingly—but the situation is even worse than that. It seems that the House of Lords has circumscribed the very circumstances in which such a discretion should be used.