Proceeding contribution from Robert Marshall-Andrews (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
I agree entirely. That is a strong tangential point to the one that I hope I am making. I would have thought that if one did not have an advocate in such circumstances, the chances that a number of cases would transgress article 6 and other parts of the convention would be very high indeed. An inquiry would take place extra-territorially, which is extremely undesirable when we ought to be able to do it ourselves. I have wearied the Committee with this example. I hope that it is thought to be one that is reasonable in the circumstances and likely to occur in a number of serious cases. I have thought about a way around that and I can find none. It prompts one particular question, which has something to do with angels and pins: who precisely does the special counsel represent and what is his role? That is not difficult. The special counsel is manifestly a minister of justice in the same way as everybody else. He is there to see that justice is done. One of his roles is precisely the same as that of a Special Immigration Appeals Commission counsel, who talks to the representative of the terrorist or suspected terrorist who is subject to a control order, finds out what his instructions are, and conveys those instructions back to the tribunal to which he has unique and independent access. I can see nothing wrong with that, but I can see enormous advantages, particularly as it is a power that will be rarely used. It will be used only in the most serious cases and when judges, in accordance with that, perceive the need for that additional power. I shall listen with interest to see what the Government say is wrong with that. So far, I have heard nothing on it. I dare say that something will come, but this is an attempt to be as helpful as one possibly can be.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1342-3
- 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 09:30:37 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494706
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494706
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494706