NEW CLAUSE.—(Place and time for legal proceedings.) (Hansard, 18 May 1939)

§ The Attorney-General (Sir Donald Somervell)
I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
Sub-section (1) of the proposed new Clause provides that proceedings for an offence under this Measure may be taken against any person at any place where he is for the time being. In the ordinary case of people who are resident in this country all the time, but for this Subsection proceedings could only be taken against them at the place where the offence was committed. In the case of refusal or failure to register that would be the place at which the man ought to have registered. It may be, however, that he will have moved from that place, and it is for everybody's convenience to provide that the proceedings can be taken at the place where he is for the time being. This also covers the case of those who commit offences outside the country, and enables proceedings to be taken against them at any place where they may be when they return home.
Sub-section (2) removes the ordinary six months' period of limitation under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts in respect of proceedings under this Measure alleged to have been committed outside Great Britain. The House knows the class of case to which this refers. We dealt with it on Clause 15 in Committee. Obviously, if you have not this Sub-section, and if the person did not return here until six months after the offence, no proceedings could be taken. In order to deal with that class of case it is, therefore, necessary to remove that limitation.

§ Mr. Silverman
I have no comment to make on the first Sub-section of the proposed new Clause, but I think the second 1668 Sub-section is wider than is necessary to meet the point which the Attorney-General says it is designed to meet. It is true that if the law is not altered in some way a person who committed an offence under the Measure, outside the country, and remained abroad for more than six months, would escape altogether. But from the wording of the new Clause it appears there is to be no limitation of any kind, so that a man who has been abroad for either a long time or a short time, may come back, well within the period of six months, and remain liable to prosecution for the rest of his natural life. I do not know whether that is what the Attorney-General intends. If he intends to alter the law so that this new criminal offence which we are creating will involve the liability of prosecution for the rest of a man's life, it requires further explanation. There are some kind of criminal offences for which there is not and should not be any period of limitation at all, but I doubt whether the House will consider an offence under this Measure to be in that category. I do not gather that the Attorney-General is inviting the House to consider this offence as an offence of that kind. He put his point in a manner which indicated that what he wanted to cover was only a sufficient period for the person to return to this country. I suggest that that point could be met, if instead of saying: may be commenced at any time after the date the new Clause said: may be commenced at any time not later than six months after the date on which he returned to this country. If the Attorney-General really means that there is to be no period of limitation of any kind, then I would invite him, with respect, to defend that rather extraordinary proposition.

§ The Attorney-General
The point which the hon. Member has just put to the House was one which occurred to me when we were considering the form of this Clause which only goes to show how great minds coincide. The form of Clause which he has suggested was not used, because it would enable an issue to be raised which it would be difficult to check and prove. A man might say, "I came back for a month last year; I was here for 1669 two months another time, and I was here for several week-ends, and all these periods add up to six months." I agree that there are certain offences in respect of which there is no limitation, but it is for the reason which I have given that I came to the conclusion that it would be a mistake in this case to put in a period of six months from the date of return. I think it is better to leave the matter at large. Prosecutions under this Act are under the control of the Minister, and there is not the slightest intention to do anything except to act promptly and expeditiously as soon as it is known that someone has returned to this country, if he does return, and the Minister can be challenged in this House.

§ Mr. Silverman
Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of putting in some proviso to say that after six months no proceedings shall be commenced without the consent of the Attorney-General?

§ The Attorney-General
It cannot be done in any case except with the consent of the Minister, and I think that is a sufficient safeguard against the abuses which the hon. Member has in mind.