Clause 31 - Further provisions about defence disclosure
Criminal Justice Bill
5:45 pm
Mr Simon Hughes (North Southwark and Bermondsey, Liberal Democrat)
The amendment relates to defence disclosure where the defendant's representative agrees
to a statement on behalf of the person represented, but without his express authority. It is a probing amendment, designed to place on record the importance of allowing legal argument about whether it is proper and appropriate to give the jury a defence statement to which the defendant has not agreed. In some circumstances, a defendant may not be physically present or it may be impossible to get agreement because the defendant is unwilling or the jury change their mind. Sometimes the defendant may not understand, and under the new system the defence are required to provide a statement, but the decision may be taken by the legal representative or with the agreement of the defendant, which might subsequently be withdrawn.
The court adjudicates on whether the statement should be shown to the jury and protection is relevant because of the risk of adverse inferences being drawn from it, particularly if it is shown to be inconsistent with later developments. The danger is that the defendant might be unjustifiably prejudiced by an interpretation put on a document produced and served on his behalf. The amendment would ensure that that argument could be put before the court.
The hon. Member for Beaconsfield suggests a second rider in amendment No. 231. It was argued earlier that the application of such measures would apply more commonly in complex fraud cases or when many defendants were involved. For practical reasons, it often proves difficult to take instructions on all aspects of the prosecution case and secure agreement to everything in a statement. It is a lesser matter than the previous one, but again we must be careful not to prejudice the defendant.