UK Parliament / Open data

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.
With the leave of the House, I should like briefly to respond to the points raised in the debate before the hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) concludes it. The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) mentioned intercept evidence and asked why we were not waiting for the Chilcot review before accepting intercept evidence in special inquests in the circumstances described in clause 13. I am in exactly the same position as he is, because I want to be very cautious about allowing intercept evidence to be made available in criminal trials. As I think the right hon. and learned Gentleman will recall, there is already provision in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 for limited exceptions to the prohibition of the evidential use of intercept, which is set out in section 17 of that Act. Those exceptions are enclosed proceedings before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission or the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission and the making of control orders under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. Of course, inquests are civil, not criminal proceedings, and Chilcot was directly related to concerns about criminal proceedings. I suggest that what we are doing is consistent with the precedent that has been set in the cases of SIAC and POAC.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c113 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top