Clause 12 - Application by prosecution for certain counts to be tried without a jury
Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill [Lords]
11:00 am
Ms Harriet Harman (Solicitor General, Law Officers' Department; Camberwell and Peckham, Labour)
As the hon. Gentleman says, this is a small amendment. He is trying to draw out issues that he rightly says we need to discuss in relation to the Government amendment and issues that surround the context of clauses 12 to 16, which deal with multiple offending.
Perhaps I can assist the hon. Gentleman by explaining that we will resist his amendment on two grounds. First, subsection (6) serves as belt and braces for the provision in subsection (3), which says:
''The first condition is that the number of counts included in the indictment is likely to mean that a trial by jury involving all of those counts would be impracticable.''
I was trying to short-cut my point there, and I will have to refer back to that later.
We agree that jury trial referred to in clause 12(6) means a trial of all the counts, as it is the inability to hold such a trial that would justify using the two-stage procedure. We are therefore not persuaded that the drafting change in the amendment is necessary. One of the things that subsection (6) could apply is the severing of the indictment and holding two separate trials. Subsection (1) states that the judge must make an order for the trial
''to take place on the basis that the trial of some, but not all, of the counts included in the indictment may be conducted without a jury.''
Three conditions then follow. The amendment does not help and is unnecessary. Clause 12 exists to prompt the judge to consider whether there is any other way of dealing with the counts. That addresses the point raised by the hon. Gentleman about whether the indictment should be severed.