Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 (Designation of Participating Countries) (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2008

rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 (Designation of Participating Countries) (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2008. The noble Lord said: The Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 streamlined and modernised the United Kingdom’s mutual legal assistance relations with the rest of the world when it came into force on 26 April 2004. Today, in an effort further to improve international co-operation and in order to comply with our international obligations, we are seeking to designate the United States of America under various sections of that Act. One of the advantages of the new arrangements is that they will improve our ability to achieve justice for British victims of serious crime. The order reflects the fact that on 25 June 2003 an agreement on mutual legal assistance between the United States of America and the European Union was concluded. As a result of the provisions of this agreement, it was necessary for the United Kingdom to amend its bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty with the United States. The terms of the amended bilateral treaty make provision for the parties to make and execute requests for assistance in locating bank accounts and to provide banking information relating to criminal investigations. This is in similar terms to European agreements aimed at tackling serious international crime, in particular, economic crime and money laundering. The domestic powers to make and receive such requests are found in Chapter 4 of Part 1 of the Act. Designation of the United States of America under Section 51(2)(b) of the Act for the purpose of Sections 32, 35, 43, 44 and 45 will allow requests for such orders to be executed in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and for such requests to be made to the United States of America by certain judicial and prosecuting authorities in the United Kingdom. Designation under Sections 35 and 44 of the Act—account monitoring orders—is not required under the strict terms of the agreement. However it is felt that such designation would be sensible, especially given that the Secretary of State retains a discretion whether to issue directions under Section 35. Likewise, no express provision has been made to limit the designations to terrorist and money laundering cases, as is permissible under the agreement, because the Home Secretary retains a discretion whether to issue a direction under Section 35. It would be open to the Home Secretary to refuse to make such a direction where the request was made in a non-terrorist or money laundering case. In relation to outgoing requests, there is no such discretion. It will be up to the United States to decide whether to refuse a request to it on the basis that it was outwith the treaty. The amended treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States of America will provide both Governments with a sound framework for future co-operation. We are clear that we will not allow criminals to escape justice simply because the evidence required is located overseas, and we are committed to assisting our international partners in doing the same. That is what the order seeks to achieve and I commend it to the Committee. I beg to move. Moved, That, the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 (Designation of Participating Countries) (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2008. 22nd Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord West of Spithead.)