---

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill

The House finds itself in an invidious position. In June, the House of Lords held in the case of Davis that measures taken to protect the identities of witnesses were incompatible with common law. As a consequence, a number of current criminal cases have been thrown into doubt and, whatever view one takes, that uncertainty needs to be addressed quickly. The Law Lords made it clear, however, that subject to the overriding need for a fair trial there is scope for Parliament to legislate to allow by statute greater use of anonymous evidence than common law permits. The legislation must be consistent with the right to fair trial, not least because it would otherwise be incompatible with article 6 of the European convention on human rights. As I said in the House two weeks ago:"““We recognise our constitutional duty to scrutinise as best we can all legislation…and not to attempt to hinder the Government improperly…My party is committed to working with the Government in a constructive way to deal with this problem””.—[Official Report, 26 June 2008; Vol. 478, c. 517.]" That is what we have sought to do and I am grateful to the Justice Secretary for his approach. Accordingly, we support the principle behind the Bill, but we have concerns about its scope.