---

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill

I understand the noble Viscount’s concerns. I do not think that the amendment proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, assists. These amendments would change the conditions for making a witness anonymity order, which are set out in Clause 4. Amendment No. 6A would make the witness’s credibility—currently a consideration that the court must take into account, as set out in Clause 5(2)(e)—into a fourth condition for making a witness anonymity order. I accept that Amendments Nos. 4D, 7D and 8B are consequential. I suggest to the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, that the amendment is unnecessary because the consideration of credibility goes to the question of whether the defendant will have a fair trial. That is already secured by condition B in making an order, as set out in Clause 4(4). Furthermore, conditions A to C set out the high-level principles—necessity, fair trial and interests of justice—for the court to apply, whereas the credibility of a witness is an aspect of assessing the second condition, which is fair trial. We believe that it sits correctly among the considerations in Clause 5. We do not think that the amendment does what the noble Lord wishes and that the way it is expressed does precisely what he wants in terms of spearing the mischief that he is most concerned about. Therefore, we believe that the clause as currently expressed accurately enables justice to be done and a fair trial to be obtained, and makes it clear that the safety of the witness is the primary consideration, or certainly comes first in terms of necessity. I remind the noble Lord that Clause 4 starts with ““necessary”” and then establishes conditions A, B and C. Subsection (6) in relation to fear relates to condition A.