Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Butler-Sloss (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 10 June 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Coroners and Justice Bill.


Coroners and Justice Bill

This amendment presents certain difficulties. It would be desirable to have this power available, but in exceptional circumstances. The family courts have now been opened to the press, but judges have the power to exclude the press in exceptional circumstances. The welfare of children in the family law system is paramount. It is very important that we should recognise, with regard to the welfare of child siblings of a child who has died—particularly a child or young person under 18 who has died in the manner of the very sad deaths in Bridgend—that the effect is absolutely devastating. There are various ways in which this might be dealt with. Under Clause 36(2)(e), I hope that the, ""provision for a senior coroner to have power to give a direction, in proceedings at an inquest, allowing or requiring a name or other matter not to be disclosed except to persons specified in the direction"," would meet the need for what I might call the muzzling of the press in appropriate cases—if I have read that clause correctly. That would seem to be the more suitable way of dealing with the majority of cases. However, the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff, has made a powerful point for a small minority of cases where perhaps the local as much as the national press might not be able to contain themselves. She was talking about exceptional cases. Perhaps I may hypothesise on what the noble Baroness, Lady Knight, said. I can see the situation arising in which the family would say to the coroner, "We have already had the press around us on this suicide. We are desperate that the press behave themselves, and the only way for that to happen is not to allow them to come into the inquest". Therefore, I see this issue being brought by the family, or by the lawyers or friends of the family, to the senior coroner at the start of an inquest rather than during the hearing. I can see an exceptional circumstance but I should not have thought that it would be appropriate for most siblings. Therefore, I believe that the press should be there but with the requirement that they cannot publish the name or any facts that the coroner says they cannot publish.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c705-6 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Codes of practice Devolved matters Administration of justice Armed forces Death Accidents Certification Coroners Custodial treatment Families Inquiries Juries Electronic surveillance Evidence Intelligence services Legal aid scheme Ethnic groups Mental illness National security Police Powers Public interest Prisons Newspaper press Minority groups Relatives Post-mortems Lord Advocate Psychiatric hospitals Scotland Registration Young people Road traffic Suicide Secure psychiatric units
Legislation
Coroners and Justice Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk