Clause 12 - Variation or revocation of freezing orders
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
5:30 pm
Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)
This is slightly different because, in another place, there was no debate on this clause. It was passed on the nod for the sake of speed. The Committee will be pleased that I will once again be very brief. However, there is one question that I wish to put to the Minister. It is a serious question, which he may want to discuss with his officials. I am happy for the Minister to write to me, instead of responding today.
Clause 12 deals with variation or revocation. The provisions in general terms seem absolutely fine. However, at the moment, any person who is affected can apply to vary or revoke under clause 12(2)(d). That is fine, after the original order has been made. I am seeking reassurance that any person who might be affected will have the right to be heard during the consideration of the original application. Let us suppose that an application is being made, and people who might be affected come to hear about it. That is not beyond all likelihood. If the person who might be affected by it is aware that an application is being heard, there is nothing specific that gives that person the right to be heard—locus standi, as lawyers
call it—during the original application. They have the right to come along afterwards and be heard on an application to vary or revoke, but that could lead to more court time and more court costs, after the event. I would like the Minister to consider with his officials whether it could be made clear—perhaps through a small Government amendment—that as well as having the right to apply to vary or revoke, a person who may be affected will have rights of audience and rights to be heard when the original application is considered. As I read it, that is not clear in the Bill.