Proceeding contribution from Lord Garnier (Conservative) 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 am fascinated by the Secretary of State's story. In the absence of a special counsel, I would accept the thrust of what the Secretary of State is saying, but as that would be the purpose of a special counsel he cannot dismiss my arguments—or rather those I borrowed—in relation to amendment No. 20 without bringing into the picture the need for a special counsel. Once a special counsel was doing the job that the Secretary of State did in his surgery, or that somebody else might do for the court, much of his objection would fall away.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1350
- 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 09:30:34 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494732
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494732
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494732