Clause 4 - Use of telephones for review of police detention
Criminal Justice Bill
6:30 pm
Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield, Conservative)
The amendment would make an important and sensible change. The intention behind the clause was clear to me when I first read it, but became much less clear when I started to consider what was already in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and when I read the explanatory notes. I may have completely misunderstood what is intended, in which case the Minister will put me right.
The explanatory notes state that the provision
''enables reviews of the continuing need for detention without charge . . . to be conducted over the telephone rather than in person at the police station'',
as is currently the case. However, under section 40 of the 1984 Act, provision is made for review when a person has been arrested and not charged. Section 40(1)(b) states that a review must be carried out
''in the case of a person who has been arrested but not charged, by an officer of at least the rank of inspector who has not been directly involved in the investigation.''
Section 40A(1) states:
''This section applies, notwithstanding anything in section 40 above, where in the case of a person who has been arrested but not charged . . . it is not reasonably practicable for an officer of at least the rank of inspector to be present in the police station where that person is held to carry out any review of that person's detention that is required by subsection (1)(b) of that section''.
The review is not a conferencing review. Section 40A(2) continues:
''The review may be carried out by an officer of at least the rank of inspector who has access to a means of communication by telephone to persons in the police station where the arrested person is held.''
The Minister and I may be on common ground, but under the current rules it is possible to carry out reviews of detention of a person who has not been charged by telephone. To that extent, the explanatory notes are misleading or I have not understood something important about them. What is the consequence of the clause as it stands?
The new subsection seems to remove the need for the involvement of any police officer at inspector rank. It states:
''A review under section 40(1)(b) may be carried out by means of a discussion, conducted by telephone, with one or more persons at the police station where the arrested person is held.''
The new subsection does not specify who is supposed to carry out the necessary discussion. It is a wondrously nebulous concept that to carry out a review one has only to pick up a telephone and talk to some unspecified disembodied individual at the other end. What is the intention behind this provision? I detect that the need for the inspector's presence at the other end of the telephone has been removed.