Clause 66 - Interests of justice
Criminal Justice Bill
2:45 pm
Mr Simon Hughes (North Southwark and Bermondsey, Liberal Democrat)
I want to speak to amendment No. 332. It is also an attempt to make clear what we are talking about in this important clause, which will define the test to be used by the Court of Appeal. It is proposed that there be four considerations.
Amendment No. 332 is about the first of those. I am sympathetic to amendment No. 266. Amendment No. 332 would delete ''it is likely that'' from subsection (2)(a), so that the simple test should be whether a fair trial would be possible. Including ''it is likely that'' seems to give subsection (2)(a) a different meaning. If the meaning were not thereby different, including ''it is likely that'' would be tautologous, as it would be repetitious. No significantly different test is added.
Life is likely to be made more difficult for the Court of Appeal, as another question will be added that it has to consider answering. If the first condition is meant to be the ballpark condition of fairness and there are subsequent conditions to be added that are sufficiently important, it would be better to amend subsection (2)(a), as we suggest. It is none the less important to add something along the lines of amendment No. 314.
All Opposition members of the Committee have regularly raised the issue of media reporting. Whatever else we do not make explicit, we must be explicit on that. I would be grateful if the Minister would consider alternative formulations of words for subsection (2)(a); that is why the amendment is on the amendment paper.