The Bar, MPs and civil liberties groups warns that Justice Secretary's plans may have 'serious detrimental effects'
Frances Gibb, Legal Editor
#yiv1558868679 div#related-article-links p a, #yiv1558868679 div#related-article-links p a:visited {
color:#06c;}
Jack Straw faces mounting opposition over plans for "secret" inquests, tougher sentencing powers and reforms to the law on mercy-killing that come before MPs today.
Leaders of the legal profession, MPs and civil liberties groups are warning that the Justice Secretary's wide-ranging Coroners and Justice Bill could have "dangerous" and "serious detrimental effects" on the justice system.
The Bar says that proposed powers on a sentencing council, for instance, will fetter judges' discretion to tailor sentences to the crime. Plans to reform coroners' inquests will undermine the importance of the coroner's jury, they say.
In briefing paper to MPs the Bar Council also says that the Bill contains "far-reaching changes to existing legislation which have not been given sufficient thought."
Related Links
Coroners and justice: new year, newish Bill
The 'right to die' is a fashionable nonsense
Desmond Browne, QC, the Bar Council chairman, said: "The Bill as currently drafted could have serious detrimental effects on our justice system."
Peter Lodder, QC, the chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, added that any legislation had to be robust and serve the public interest. "We are concerned that the Bill as it stands contains a number of measures which do not achieve this," he said.
The Bar leaders are calling first for the proposed reforms on assisted suicide to be dropped from the bill. The Bill aims to make clear that assisting a suicide via the internet is a crime. But the Bar Council says it is opposed to any reform of the law on assisted suicide or mercy killing without "extensive consultation." It warns that "it is wrong, in principle, to amend this sensitive area of the law without extensive consultation, and dangerous to do so for fear of unintended consequences."
It welcomes the next tranche of proposed reform, to the laws on murder. But it backs recent comments by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the senior law lord, over proposals to stop sexual infidelity being a reason to invoke the defence of provocation. Husbands and wives could both taunt their spouses with sexual infidelity and use it as a "weapon of torture", the Bar Council says, and part of bullying which "so often forms the worst of mental cruelty." But under the present proposals, a defence lawyer may argue that that the dead husband or wife was flaunting infidelity - and this provoked the spouse to attack - but juries will have to disregard admissions of infidelity.
A third area of concern is the revived proposals to allow inquests to be held in private. The Bar says that these proposals are "virtually unchanged" since they came before Parliament last year in the Counter-Terrorism Bill.
It says that it a power is needed, enabling a HIgh Court judge to be appointed to sit as a coroner and hold part or all of an inquest in private on national security grounds, then the decision on whether to hold a private inquest should be for the High Court judge himself, it says.
The Bill also reduces the number of jurors from between 7-11 to 6-9. The jury is the "foundation for public confidence" in sensitive inquests and should be retained at the larger size to prevent any possibility of bias, the Bar says.
It also criticises the Bill for failing to address the lack of public funding for bereaved families and other interested parties at inquests, which at present is only granted in "exceptional" circumstances.
Finally, it welcomes proposals for a sentencing council but warns that judges' discretion will be fettered if they are made to follow the guidelines, as proposed, rather than take account of them.
The Justice Committee of MPs has also expressed concerns about the Bill.
A report just published says that it raises expectations for a reformed national coroners' service, including a charter for the bereaved, which may not be met with new funds. As a result, inequalities in the service will continue to exist, it says.
MPs also warn that the revived proposals for "secret" inquests have not received any consultation and will merit "close and careful scrutiny". The Government must be prepared to withdraw the measures if it cannot justify them as proportionate and compatible with the Human Rights Act.
Frances Gibb, Legal Editor
#yiv1558868679 div#related-article-links p a, #yiv1558868679 div#related-article-links p a:visited {
color:#06c;}
Jack Straw faces mounting opposition over plans for "secret" inquests, tougher sentencing powers and reforms to the law on mercy-killing that come before MPs today.
Leaders of the legal profession, MPs and civil liberties groups are warning that the Justice Secretary's wide-ranging Coroners and Justice Bill could have "dangerous" and "serious detrimental effects" on the justice system.
The Bar says that proposed powers on a sentencing council, for instance, will fetter judges' discretion to tailor sentences to the crime. Plans to reform coroners' inquests will undermine the importance of the coroner's jury, they say.
In briefing paper to MPs the Bar Council also says that the Bill contains "far-reaching changes to existing legislation which have not been given sufficient thought."
Related Links
Coroners and justice: new year, newish Bill
The 'right to die' is a fashionable nonsense
Desmond Browne, QC, the Bar Council chairman, said: "The Bill as currently drafted could have serious detrimental effects on our justice system."
Peter Lodder, QC, the chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, added that any legislation had to be robust and serve the public interest. "We are concerned that the Bill as it stands contains a number of measures which do not achieve this," he said.
The Bar leaders are calling first for the proposed reforms on assisted suicide to be dropped from the bill. The Bill aims to make clear that assisting a suicide via the internet is a crime. But the Bar Council says it is opposed to any reform of the law on assisted suicide or mercy killing without "extensive consultation." It warns that "it is wrong, in principle, to amend this sensitive area of the law without extensive consultation, and dangerous to do so for fear of unintended consequences."
It welcomes the next tranche of proposed reform, to the laws on murder. But it backs recent comments by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the senior law lord, over proposals to stop sexual infidelity being a reason to invoke the defence of provocation. Husbands and wives could both taunt their spouses with sexual infidelity and use it as a "weapon of torture", the Bar Council says, and part of bullying which "so often forms the worst of mental cruelty." But under the present proposals, a defence lawyer may argue that that the dead husband or wife was flaunting infidelity - and this provoked the spouse to attack - but juries will have to disregard admissions of infidelity.
A third area of concern is the revived proposals to allow inquests to be held in private. The Bar says that these proposals are "virtually unchanged" since they came before Parliament last year in the Counter-Terrorism Bill.
It says that it a power is needed, enabling a HIgh Court judge to be appointed to sit as a coroner and hold part or all of an inquest in private on national security grounds, then the decision on whether to hold a private inquest should be for the High Court judge himself, it says.
The Bill also reduces the number of jurors from between 7-11 to 6-9. The jury is the "foundation for public confidence" in sensitive inquests and should be retained at the larger size to prevent any possibility of bias, the Bar says.
It also criticises the Bill for failing to address the lack of public funding for bereaved families and other interested parties at inquests, which at present is only granted in "exceptional" circumstances.
Finally, it welcomes proposals for a sentencing council but warns that judges' discretion will be fettered if they are made to follow the guidelines, as proposed, rather than take account of them.
The Justice Committee of MPs has also expressed concerns about the Bill.
A report just published says that it raises expectations for a reformed national coroners' service, including a charter for the bereaved, which may not be met with new funds. As a result, inequalities in the service will continue to exist, it says.
MPs also warn that the revived proposals for "secret" inquests have not received any consultation and will merit "close and careful scrutiny". The Government must be prepared to withdraw the measures if it cannot justify them as proportionate and compatible with the Human Rights Act.
No comments:
Post a Comment