Absolutely. The whole purpose of the Bill's provisions on coroners is to strengthen and improve how the coronial system operates—not least in respect of military inquests investigating cases in which relatives have lost loved ones who were serving the country. There will be a chief coroner, who will be a High Court judge, and a deputy coroner, and there will be much greater co-ordination between coroners; we will be able to provide a better service than what has been possible until now. Furthermore, there will be proper rights of appeal when there are concerns. It will no longer be necessary judicially to review coroners' decisions, because proper rights of appeal are embedded in the Bill.
I fully understand the important points of principle raised by the issue—which is narrow, as I shall explain—of whether there will be circumstances in which the court might decide that the only way forward would be without a jury. There are two excellent examples, both of which have been raised by the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham). Neither example—although there is now only one—involved the death of a military serviceperson.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jack Straw
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 March 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c74 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:52:49 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543366
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543366
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543366