My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl: it is quite difficult to get one’s head around exactly what this amendment seeks to do. I suppose I am trying to emphasise that there should still be a high bar to overcome before the defence could be successfully deployed. Even if it was successful, noble Lords must remember that Clause 46 allows a partial, not a full, defence. The conviction is not overturned but reduced from murder to manslaughter. That is important because, as noble Lords well know, a conviction for murder attracts the mandatory life sentence, whereas a broader range of sentences—which may be more appropriate in the circumstances—are available for manslaughter.
These amendments were proposed by the Standing Committee for Youth Justice in an effort to give effect to the Law Commission’s recommendation in its 2004 report, Partial Defences to Murder, which was itself designed to bring the criminal law into compliance with Article 40 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. In Committee your Lordships gave these and other similar amendments a full and considered debate. I think considerable support was then voiced around the House for them. I therefore hope that the Minister and his colleagues have been able to reflect on these amendments over the summer and will give them a serious hearing. I beg to move.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Wirral
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 October 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c1031 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:23:05 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588493
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588493
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588493