Clause 62 - Cases that may be retried
Criminal Justice Bill
9:10 am

Photo of Mr Dominic Grieve

Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield, Conservative)

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. When I saw the schedule for the first time, I was startled. It was not what I had expected, having read the White Paper and the preliminary discussions that had taken place in the House and outside about the desirability of the introduction of the measure. I am open-minded. I hope that, having heard the Minister, I shall have an opportunity to respond to him further. I

also hope to hear the views of other members of the Committee on the matter.

I have an anxiety that the scope of schedule 4 goes too far, and that, as a result, we shall drive a cart and horses through the old principle of double jeopardy, so that it will be reserved not for exceptional cases, but for cases in which the prosecution simply discover further evidence and want to reopen the issue. If I understood the Government's approach to the matter correctly, they were at some pains to emphasise that that measure was to be exceptional. The current drafting of schedule 4 suggests that it could be much more than exceptional: it could turn into a matter of routine. That said, I also acknowledge that the offences listed in schedule 4 are of a type that many would consider fairly serious—I consider class A drugs offences to be very serious. However, where do we draw the line? We should think about that.

I think that I have broadly covered my amendments, and do not wish to take up too much time. Amendment No. 330 inserts the words ''murder or genocide'' in subsection (8)—a recognition of another offence that we accept should be covered. Amendment No. 348 leaves out schedule 4 entirely. It is not grouped with amendment No. 343, although it follows consequentially from it.

I hope that that provides some material on which the Committee can consider the issue, and on which the Minister can respond. I am wholly pragmatic about the matter. I accept that there is a legitimate argument to revise the law, although I have some anxieties about that as a lawyer.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.