Proceeding contribution from Geoffrey Cox (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 wonder whether the Minister could answer a question for me. How does the ““reasonable fear”” of injury relate to the decision that the judge must make under clause 4(3) about the necessity of protecting the witness's safety? Either the measures are necessary to protect their safety or they are not. Whether I have a ““reasonable fear”” is not relevant to whether the measures are necessary to protect my safety, is it?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1374
- 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 09:30:57 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494797
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494797
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494797