Proceeding contribution from Andrew Dismore (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 8 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.
Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill
My concern is that that would become a routine, rather than the exception. However, in those very dangerous cases, the point that the hon. Gentleman makes is a fair one. It has been said that we did not have this procedure in the trials of the Richardsons or the Krays, but those gangs were around for years and years, intimidating the east end. If it had been available then, we may well have been able to deal with them at an earlier stage. As far as the Director of Public Prosecutions has been able to establish, there has not been one anonymity case in a magistrates court, and only one in the juvenile courts. It has been suggested that magistrates courts should be excluded, but the fact remains that under counter-terrorism laws, some cases are triable either way, so it is dangerous to suggest that magistrates courts should be entirely excluded. Turning to the relevant considerations, the Government have tabled an important amendment on the ““sole or decisive”” issue, which satisfies a key concern of the European Court of Human Rights. However, we must also consider the issue of the defendant being responsible for intimidation. Mr. O'Connor considered that point, and if the defendant is responsible for intimidation, he can hardly complain about witness anonymity interfering with his article 6 rights. For that very reason, that should be one of the relevant considerations, and it sends a clear message that those who become involved in intimidation should not expect witnesses to give evidence openly against them. A number of hon. Members wish to speak, so I shall conclude. As far as I am concerned, the Bill complies with article 6. The Government have moved significantly in their amendments, although there are one or two things we can do to tweak up the Bill today and in the other place. Broadly, however, my right hon. Friend the Justice Secretary has done a very good job in dealing with a very difficult set of circumstances with which he has been faced in a very urgent way.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1319
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Appeals Crime Common law Evidence Human rights European Convention on Human Rights House of Lords Intimidation Judgements Protection Sentencing Witnesses Trials 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 09:30:45 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494654
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494654
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494654