HC Deb 01 April 1953 vol 513 cc1186-7
10. Mr. A. J. Irvine

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what instructions he gave to those appearing for the High Commissioner at the hearing of the petition for habeas corpus filed on behalf of Dr. Naumann regarding any application that might be made by counsel appearing for Dr. Naumann to interview their client.

The Minister of State (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd)

The instructions given by the High Commissioner to his legal adviser were referred to and approved by my right hon. Friend. These instructions were that any application by counsel for Dr. Naumann to interview their client should be opposed. At the first habeas corpus hearing, however, the High Commissioner's Legal Adviser suggested, on my right hon. Friend's authority, that Mr. Scott Henderson, but not the other defence lawyers, might be allowed to see his client, but Mr. Scott Henderson did not accept this.

Mr. Irvine

Does not the Minister of State think, in the light of events, that if judicial proceedings of this character are to take place in occupied territory it is regrettable that this restraint should be placed upon the right of a petitioner to contact counsel who can speak his own language? Does he not regret the whole thing, having regard to the effect on public opinion and on the justice of the case?

Mr. Lloyd

I think the light of events, when cast upon this matter, will show that the decision of my right hon. Friend was abundantly justified.

Mr. Fletcher-Cooke

Would my right hon. and learned Friend not agree that the certificate originally produced by counsel to the respondent in these habeas corpus proceedings did not distinguish at all between English counsel and German counsel, and was a flat veto on any of the applicants seeing any of their counsel of any nationality?

Mr. Lloyd

That may be so, but, in fact, it was suggested that if Mr. Scott Henderson wanted to see his clients he could do so.

Mr. Mott-Radclyffe

Has the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend been drawn to a report published in certain German newspapers that the Allies handed over Dr. Naumann and his associates to the German authorities because of insufficient evidence being available for a prosecution on their part?

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

I have heard of such suggestions, but they are quite untrue and inaccurate. I do not think I can do better than invite hon. Members on both sides of the House to pay some regard to what the German Chancellor said about that article.

Forward to