Clause 50
Policing and Crime Bill
12:45 pm
Vernon Coaker (Minister of State (Policing, Crime & Security), Home Office; Gedling, Labour)
The hon. Gentleman’s last point is a matter for the court to determine. The provision is not prescriptive; the hon. Gentleman has read the Bill and the clause’s wording, which is that “the judge may order”. It is not a case of the judge must do this or that; there is flexibility. Let me take the judicial side of the argument by stating that it is a matter for the judiciary, and judicial oversight of the clause will determine what is appropriate in the circumstances of each individual case.
Under proposed new section (8A)(3) of the Extradition Act, a judge may order further proceedings to be deferred, but he does not have to if that does not serve the interests of justice. It is not the judge must, but that he may do so. Rather than letting the Government determine what is appropriate in the circumstances of every individual case at a particular point in proceedings, the clause gives the flexibility that I think the hon. Gentleman is looking for.
In response to the hon. Gentleman’s first point, the amended wording is necessary to ensure that it is absolutely clear that a decision on extradition will be deferred until someone falls to be released from detention, rather than until the end of any licensed period. The words “or otherwise” cover the position where someone falls to be released from custody, but is not released on licence. That is necessary to cover sentences where release from detention is unconditional. Clause 52(10) makes it plain that temporary release, which is properly described as a release pursuant to an intermittent custody order, is excluded from the scope of the provisions. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is satisfied with that explanation and able to support the clause.