Clause 65 - New and compelling evidence
Criminal Justice Bill
9:10 am
Mr Ian Lucas (Wrexham, Labour)
Let me make it clear that I strongly support the proposal to give the Court of Appeal powers to reopen cases in which persuasive new evidence comes to light. I tabled the amendments because I have doubts about the wording that is used with regard to the process of determining which matters should come before the Court of Appeal. My concern is twofold. First, the threshold set out in subsections (1) to (3) is too high, and secondly, because of the wording, there is a danger that there will be a determination—or something close to a final determination—of any case that comes before the Court of Appeal before it has had the chance to go back before a jury to be considered in full.
A sifting process is already in place, through both the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Court of Appeal. The DPP will bring the matter before the Court of Appeal only when he has made a determination. The amendment would require new, reliable and persuasive evidence to be put before the court before the matter could be referred back for trial by jury. That seems to me to be the right approach.
I am concerned about the words
''highly probably that the person is guilty of the offence.''
If someone has been found by the Court of Appeal to be highly probably guilty, that creates difficulties for a jury that is aware of that finding in making its subsequent determination. There might be some resistance by the jury to the initial finding. I am
object not to the principle but to the wording. As I mentioned last week, the Court of Appeal can currently find a conviction unsafe and unsatisfactory and refer it back for a retrial. My objection is not to the principle but to the fact the clause as drafted is not helpful. My particular concern is that it is not clear that the clause provides for the defendant to be fully represented.
Clause 67(4) states that the defendant can be present at the hearing. I wish to hear more about what exactly that means. Does it mean that the defendant will be represented at the hearing and will have the right to make representations? I would be grateful to hear from the Minister on those concerns.