Clause 82 - Foreign surveillance operations
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
11:00 am
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland, Liberal Democrat)
The hon. Gentleman must be aware that individuals—citizens or subjects; call them what you will—have the right not to incriminate themselves. That is why we have different forms of caution, including caution preceding charge and caution preceding questioning. That will not be the situation under clause 82. Surveillance is one thing, but proceeding to question an individual without making him aware of who is questioning him or why is a different matter. That is why we could end up with evidence not being admissible. It could happen with the best will in the world. For instance, a foreign officer who was thought to have exceeded his powers might consider that his evidence had been fairly obtained according to the standards of criminal procedure and the law of evidence in his country, but those standards might not match the standards that would apply in a United Kingdom court. That is why it is important that the provision is tightly drawn.