Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Coroners and Justice Bill.

Coroners and Justice Bill

My point is a different one: as I said in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), the judge does not have to set aside the original certificate by the Secretary of State that national security, serious crime or the other criteria have kicked in, to decide that a non-jury inquest is not necessary to meet the conditions under the Bill. The amendment is clear that the judge can decide that there are adequate precautions to protect the relevant material, with a jury. That will be the first port of call.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c95 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Data protection Crime prevention Courts Armed forces Death Coroners Juries Evidence Judges Legal representation Immunity certificates Foreign relations National security Northern Ireland Protection Parliamentary scrutiny Public inquiries Scotland Standards Terrorism Witnesses High Court
Legislation
Coroners and Justice Bill 2008-09
Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk