Skip to main content

1-20 of 289 results for subject:Intimidation

Subject X
Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (289)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

This is a series of amendments to raise the threshold in the statutory test. I should like first to consider this in the round. I accept the need for a robust test and to ensure fairness, but fairness needs to be seen in the round as well. Fairness to the...

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c114-5GC
House
House of Lords

I have also put my name to Amendment No. 3. I do not have anything significant to add to the comments that have been made, but thought I should make it clear that I have not resiled from signing the amendment. I still think it is desirable to have the...

Member
Lord Trimble (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c114GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 3: 3: Clause 1, page 1, line 8, leave out ““suspects”” and insert ““is satisfied”” The noble Lord said: With this, I shall discuss Amendments Nos. 6 and 9. The Bill gives the DPP for Northern Ireland the power to issue a certificate that a trial on...

Member
Lord Avebury (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c110-2GC
House
House of Lords

I am grateful to the noble Lord. I just want to make this very clear. If he or any Member of the Committee who has spoken would find it helpful to discuss this with me before the next stage of the Bill, I would be very happy to do so....

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c110GC
House
House of Lords

These amendments would extend even further the circumstances under which the DPP could issue a certificate for a non-jury trial and it is tempting to support them for that reason. While we recognise that there is a strong connection between paramilitary organisations and organised crime in Northern Ireland, we believe...

Member
Lord Smith of Clifton (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c119GC
House
House of Lords

Will the noble and learned Lord also consider the phrase ““reasonable foreseeability””—if it is reasonably foreseeable? As he will know, that is the test for civil liability. It is a little more sensible than pure risk and not quite so tough as the next one up.

Member
Lord Mayhew of Twysden (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c116GC
House
House of Lords

I was explaining why it would be asking too much to expect the Director of Public Prosecutions to be satisfied that there was an impairment to justice given the need to have evidence—of which there is very little—to support such a judgment. He would have to make a judgment in...

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c116GC
House
House of Lords

Will the noble and learned Lord take my word for it that if he puts ““substantial risk”” in a search engine, he will find dozens of statutes where this term is used?

Member
Lord Avebury (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c116GC
House
House of Lords

Yes, substantial risk.

Member
Lord Avebury (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c116GC
House
House of Lords

There is a problem with that. If I may, I shall just explain why. Public interest immunity—I say this for other readers of this debate—is a procedure under which the prosecution goes to a judge to say, ““Please will you relieve us of the obligation of disclosing this information to...

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c132-3GC
House
House of Lords

The noble and learned Lord lays some weight on the assertion that this is not an ouster clause. Surely, he will acknowledge that it is an ouster provision, and that is what really matters. Clause 7 says the court may not entertain. That means it cannot grant a hearing. It...

Member
Lord Mayhew of Twysden (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c135GC
House
House of Lords

Almost certainly mine, then.

Member
Lord Mayhew of Twysden (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c138GC
House
House of Lords

The amendment illustrates the difficulties in getting this absolutely right. The noble Lord, Lord Trimble, has made a case for having an even wider set of conditions under which non-jury trial could be ordered. He recognises quite rightly that those cases of organised crime which are connected with paramilitary organisations...

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c120GC
House
House of Lords

I support the amendment. A number of sound points have been made. The Attorney-General recently remarked, ““What a village we live in. Everybody knows everybody else””. That is absolutely true. The noble Lord, Lord Trimble, has made the point about the relationship between organised crime and paramilitaries and the fact...

Member
Lord Glentoran (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c119-20GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 12: 12: Clause 1 , page 2, line 22, and insert— ““( ) In determining whether the conditions in subsection (9)(d) or (e) are fulfilled, the Director of Public Prosecutions must consider whether there is evidence of a significant relationship between A and B.”” The noble Baroness...

Member
Baroness Harris of Richmond (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c121-2GC
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 14: 14: After Clause 6 , insert the following new Clause— ““Challenge of issue of certificate (1) There shall be a commission, to be known as the Special Appeals Commission. (2) Where a certificate has been issued under section 1 the defendant may appeal to the Commission....

Member
Lord Glentoran (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c124GC
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister. I tabled that amendment to make the point that those three items, (a), (b) and (c), should not be seen as a comprehensive list. There must be many other reasons and ways to come to the same decision.

Member
Lord Glentoran (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c125GC
House
House of Lords

The noble Lord’s amendments deal with two connected but separate matters. One, as has just been apparent from the intervention by the noble Lord, Lord Trimble, relates to Clause 7. I shall deal with that first before coming back to Amendment No. 14 and the following amendments, which provide a...

Member
Lord Goldsmith (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c125GC
House
House of Lords

I am not going to repeat anything I have said, because what I have said is clearly on the record. One would be stupid not to note the annoyance—although I would probably put it stronger than that if I were outside Parliament—of noble Lords at some of the issues they...

Member
Lord Rooker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c152GC
House
House of Lords

We will do our best to answer any questions that come our way. As I have said, the argument for placing what we can call Clause 14-type restrictions on the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland might be plausible, but we do not think it is necessary. The remit of the...

Member
Lord Rooker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
19 March 2007
Reference
690 c151GC
House
House of Lords