The amendment illustrates the difficulties in getting this absolutely right. The noble Lord, Lord Trimble, has made a case for having an even wider set of conditions under which non-jury trial could be ordered. He recognises quite rightly that those cases of organised crime which are connected with paramilitary organisations would already be caught by the test. There is no need to extend the definition in the way provided for in his amendment in order to catch those cases. He also rightly identifies the cases that would in practice be caught by the amendment as those cases of organised crime which are unconnected with paramilitary organisations. The question to determine then is whether the same risks to the administration of justice arise in cases of that kind.
The Government’s view has been that such cases do not pose the same risks to the administration of justice. I do not deny that organised crime can give rise to risks to the administration of justice through jury tampering, but they would be met by the provisions of Section 44 of the Criminal JusticeAct 2003. I hope that that illustrates that the Government have been looking carefully at where it is right to draw the line. On the amendment, the noble Lords, Lord Trimble and Lord Glentoran, take the view that it would be wise to extend the circumstances whereas the noble Lord, Lord Smith, takes a different view. Maybe that is an indication that we have been looking very carefully to get the position right.
The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee was also supportive of retaining non-jury trial for organised crime cases. That can be put in support of what the noble Lord, Lord Trimble, said. As I understandthe report, it was more concerned with potential intimidation of witnesses. I do not believe that non-jury trial affects that issue at all. Sadly, witnesses can be intimidated in both non-jury trials and jury trials. I do not think that its particular focus really takes the matter any further.
For those reasons, although recognising the case that the noble Lord makes, the Government believe that we have put in the right position, having carefully considered which cases really give rise to the sort of risks that would be covered by this extended procedure. I am afraid that I therefore cannot accept the amendment.
Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Goldsmith
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c120GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:46:21 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385901
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385901
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385901