Clause 31 - Hearing witnesses in the uk by telephone
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
4:00 pm
Mr James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 49, in
clause 31, page 18, line 20, at end insert—
'(d) confirm that the witness has received independent legal advice'.
After the previous debate, I would be interested to be a fly on the wall when the Minister has a private session with his officials later. I am reminded of an occasion when I was occupying a similar role in a different Department. I foolishly stated to a large audience that the speech that I had been given was so boring that I was not going to deliver it, and that I had written one of my own. Immediately afterwards, a grovelling official came up to me to apologise for writing such a boring speech. I had not realised that she had been present when I made that statement. It is very easy to say the wrong thing.
As for amendment No. 49, we have cantered round the course in a different context. However, where we are seeking to require that the witnesses received independent legal advice, there is a unique context. We have been discussing that we are addressing something that does not exist in the British legal system—the giving of evidence by telephone. For a witness who may well be accustomed to the British system, this would be completely foreign—I use that word advisedly—territory: they will not know about it. If a witness is giving evidence by telephone—albeit accepting the Minister's earlier comment that that is voluntary—there is a case for saying that the Secretary of State should be sure that that witness has received the proper legal advice about what he may or may not be doing and the possible implications of that, especially in the light of our debate. Whatever the Minister's deliberations may demonstrate, there could be legal implications at home for what the witness may or may not say over the telephone to someone else. That is important, because we are dealing with something that is novel in the British legal system—that the witness should be given some legal advice. It is right that that should be included in the Bill.
The Minister may well refer to the fact that that was debated in the other place—it was—but the answer received then was extremely thin; it seemed to suggest that the witness was already sufficiently protected by schedule 2. That answer is not adequate. Part 2 of schedule 2—''Evidence given by telephone''—refers to the notification of the witness and the conduct of the hearing. It says simply:
''The evidence is to be given in accordance with the laws of that country'',
where the court proceedings would take place. Nowhere in part 2 is there any reference to the witness being informed of their rights, or of the legal implications of giving evidence by telephone to the country in question, or of the implications back home that may be consequential on that. That is a short, simple point, but we are talking about something novel in the British judicial system and it deserves particular investigation. I hope that the Minister will understand the importance of that matter, so that British citizens, and others who may be brought to use the system under clause 31, are fully aware of their rights.