I listened with care to the response of the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, to the point at the heart of my noble friend Lord Waddington’s amendment; namely, that we must not legislate to declare a threat something that in some circumstances cannot be a threat. To that, the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, responded that the safeguard lies in the requirement for the consent of the Attorney-General to a prosecution.
I am very hesitant indeed about placing on the Attorney-General the function of a jury in deciding whether in a particular scenario a threat is a threat. My understanding of the function of the Attorney-General, when given the discretion of the character that we are talking about, is whether a prosecution would be in the public interest, not to undertake the function of a jury in deciding whether a fact or a component of a complaint of a charge is present. I speak with some hesitation about this, having just heard the noble Lord, Lord Thomas. That would be my anxiety.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Mayhew of Twysden
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 3 March 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c922 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:37:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450982
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450982
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450982