Clause 3
Counter-Terrorism Bill
11:15 am

Photo of Tom Brake

Tom Brake (Shadow Minister (London and the Olympics), Culture, Media & Sport; Carshalton and Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move amendment No. 2, in page 2, line 44, at end insert—

‘(2A) Under subsection (2), it is not reasonably practicable, for the item subject to legal privilege to be separated from the rest of the document if, and only if, it is not reasonably practicable because of—

(a) the time required to determine whether an item should be seized or to separate such an item;

(b) the number of persons required to carry out that determination or separation; or

(c) the apparatus or equipment that would be necessary or appropriate to use for carrying out that determination or separation.’.

I suspect that we will highlight areas a number of times in our deliberations where different Acts operate in different ways or contain different details. This measure is a good example. All hon. Members accept how fundamental the safeguard of legally privileged documents is to our system. The amendment probes the Government on the difference between the proposals and the operation of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 on the safeguards that apply to the seizure of legally privileged documents, such as the time required to determine whether an item should be seized, the number of persons that are required to carry out the determination or separation and the apparatus or equipment that is necessary or appropriate to carry it out. I want to give the Minister the opportunity to explain why those caveats are included in the 2001 Act, but not in the Bill.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.