I thank Nadine Dorries for the way that she presented a complex case that is of extreme importance to her constituent and to the wider community impacted by the air accident in Greece. I also thank her for giving notice of some of the issues that she wished to raise. It is helpful for me to know about such matters in detail so that I can try to respond accordingly.

As the hon. Lady mentioned, the accident led to the loss of 121 lives and it is, understandably, an emotive issue in Greece. The Greek authorities take it particularly seriously. The implications of the Helios accident of 14 August 2005 have already been brought to the attention of the Ministry of Justice and of my colleagues in the Home Office, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Transport. The Government are willing to help and support where we can, as far as we can, wherever possible.

The Government take cases such as that of Mr. Irwin, as set out by the hon. Lady, very seriously. For that reason, as well as answering the debate, I want to offer her an opportunity to meet Ministers in the Ministry of Justice to raise these issues outside the Chamber and discuss them in more detail, if that would assist her.

I am acutely aware—the hon. Lady described it so clearly—of the incident's impact on Mr. Irwin and his family. The prospect of facing criminal charges for manslaughter with criminal intent, as well as his naming in the media, to which she also referred, have placed him under considerable strain emotionally and financially. I cannot begin to imagine the nightmare that he is going through, faced with a tragic accident that needs to be investigated and needs to be resolved and on which we all need to have answers as to why the incident occurred.

The hon. Lady mentioned a number of key points, and it is important that I respond to them. I want to touch on the principle of mutual recognition and the European arrest warrant. The general principle is that the Government should not and do not interfere in the judicial systems of other countries, particularly when the principle of mutual recognition is fundamental to our relationship with the other country.

We expect other EU member states to follow international and European standards that guarantee the rights of our citizens, and there must be mutual trust in the operation of member states' legal systems. An important principle is that just as we would not want other member states to interfere in the judicial proceedings of the United Kingdom and those that take place in our jurisdiction, we would not, in normal circumstances, intervene in proceedings in other member states.

The proceedings being discussed today, which the hon. Lady presented very well on behalf of her constituent, are at an early stage. If proceedings continued to prosecution, and indeed to conviction, a number of safeguards through EU mutual recognition instruments are in place and would be of assistance. The most important for the UK is the European arrest warrant.

That warrant contains robust safeguards against extradition of UK nationals to another member state if there is a request for extradition. Those safeguards include Double Jeopardy, the passage of time and the age of the subject. In addition, the request for a warrant must be agreed by a district judge, who must be confident that ordering extradition would not be in breach of the subject's human rights.

As the hon. Lady said, the EU is also negotiating an instrument to prevent separate prosecutions from taking place in two member states based on the same case and the same facts. That will prevent some of the difficulties facing Mr. Irwin in relation to the financial implications of two criminal prosecutions.

The hon. Lady raised a number of key questions and recorded the history well. I will try to respond to those key questions in particular, because they are the nub of the matter for her and her constituent. She asked whether I would contact my counterpart in the Ministry of Justice in Greece to discuss these issues and Mr. Irwin's case. The proceedings against him are at an early stage.

On that basis—this will disappoint the hon. Lady—it is difficult for the Government to raise the case with the Greek authorities because that would be seen as interfering with the independence of the investigation. I will keep the matter under review and, as ever, we can continue to consider whether we can discuss it in future, depending on the outcome of progress on prosecution. However, until such time as the Greek authorities have determined their course of action, this is a particularly difficult matter for us to raise.

The hon. Lady asked whether we can raise the issue of the use of the report with the International Civil Aviation Organisation, in particular whether we will raise the use of the report in the criminal prosecutions. As she mentioned, paragraph 5.12 of annex 13 of the Chicago convention provides that Greece, as the state conducting the investigation of the accident, should not make evidential statements and certain other records available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation. That is clear under the convention.

However, an exception allows for the appropriate authority for the administration of justice to determine that its disclosure outweighs the adverse domestic and international impact that such action may have on that or any future investigation. If any records, such as the accident report, are being used in the prosecution, it is likely that their disclosure has been considered and permitted by the appropriate courts in Greece. I will certainly investigate that issue, and we can return to it if the hon. Lady takes up my offer of a meeting.

The hon. Lady rightly raised the important point of the defence costs, which I can understand will be a burden for Mr. Irwin, particularly as Helios Airways does not have the indemnity that I would have hoped it had. She considered the issue in relation to the separate prosecution in Cyprus, where Mr. Irwin may have to fund the Majority of his defence from his own funds and will not be reimbursed for any costs.

However, I hope that it helps the hon. Lady to know that the administration of justice in Greece, including provision of legal assistance, is a matter for the Greek authorities. Article 6(3)(c) of the European convention on human rights makes it clear that Mr. Irwin has the right to defend himself through legal assistance of his own choosing and that legal assistance is to be given free when the interests of justice so require.

If Mr. Irwin finds himself finally being prosecuted and having to fund his own defence, he should urgently make representations—I am sure that the hon. Lady can help him with that—to the Greek authorities to enable him to access the legal assistance to which he would be entitled.

The hon. Lady also raised the question whether the Government will make representations to the EU for member states to adhere to the objective of Council directive 94/56 on investigation of civil aviation accidents. Annex 13 to the Chicago convention provides:

"The sole objective of the investigation of an accident or incident shall be the prevention of accidents and incidents. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability."

I recall the hon. Lady quoting the same tract, and that objective is mirrored in Council directive 94/56. However, that does not mean that criminal proceedings should not be brought against persons who are believed to have been responsible for an accident, nor does it prohibit the use of the factual evidence contained in an accident investigation report to support such proceedings. That will be a difficult issue in relation to her constituent and the representations that she has made today, but that is the position.

The hon. Lady asked me to consider inquiring whether the Government would make representations to the UK air accidents investigation branch to reopen the investigation. I appreciate that this answer will disappoint her, but the investigation can be reopened only with the approval of the Greek authorities. While there are strong arguments that the setting of the pressurisation mode selector should not be considered a causal factor in this accident, it is not a significant issue from an accident prevention point of view. There are no air safety grounds for reopening the investigation, as far as I have been advised, so we cannot ask the AAIB to reopen the case.

When the hon. Lady has reflected on what I have said, and if she believes that there are further grounds to consider, I am happy to discuss those issues in our meeting and consider them on behalf of the Government. We recognise that this case and the prospect of criminal damages and charges are causing great distress to Mr. Irwin. I pay tribute to the hon. Lady for presenting a complex case professionally on behalf of her constituent. She will want to consider my answers. Some are disappointing to her, but I am willing to meet her, and to meet Mr. Irwin if that is appropriate, to discuss what assistance the Government can provide at this stage. Subject to progression of the case and formal prosecution, mechanisms are available whereby the British authorities can consider the issues in detail, given the complexities involved in making any approach to the independent Greek judiciary and the role of member states within the EU.

I hope that my comments are of some help to the hon. Lady and I thank her for raising this case today.