HC Deb 18 June 1959 vol 607 cc626-8
12. Mr. Lipton

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the last Home Office circular was issued dealing with the subject of costs against the police.

Mr. R. A. Butler

I assume that the hon. Member has in mind a circular of September, 1948, which dealt, among other things, with the power conferred by Section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act of that year, to award costs out of local funds to persons acquitted by courts of assize or quarter sessions.

Mr. Lipton

But as the financial injustice suffered by an acquitted person arises from the narrow interpretation contained in that circular, could not a new circular now be issued stating that costs against the police should be refused only in exceptional cases? This circular has been followed by judges ever since and, in those circumstances, why does not the Home Secretary now issue a new and revised circular?

Mr. Butler

The circular was issued with the approval of the judges. I have said before that I am looking into evidence on the whole of this matter. I would prefer not to undertake to issue a fresh circular until I have completed that review.

Mr. Ronald Bell

Is it not undesirable that a circular should be issued to any branch of the judiciary giving them advice on how they should construe and apply the provisions of an Act of Parliament?

Mr. Butler

I have read some correspondence to that effect and I have some sympathy with that view. I think there are limits to which the Executive, in a circular, can appear to be interpreting matters which have been enacted by Parliament as the Statute law of the land. There were particular circumstances in 1948 and there would need to be very particular circumstances before I renewed that practice.

25. Mr. Langford-Holt

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the growing public concern at the unfairness resulting from the fact that persons found not guilty of offences are required to pay their own defence costs thus penalising them from successfully pleading not guilty instead of guilty; and whether he will seek methods of reimbursing persons wrongly accused.

Mr. R. A. Butler

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave to the Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central (Sir F. Medlicott) on 11th June.

Mr. Langford-Holt

While I agree that it is undesirable that the Executive should give excessive advice to the judiciary, it is, of course, a matter for the conscience of Parliament to decide. Will my right hon. Friend consider one aspect of this type of thing? A case has come to my notice in which a solicitor for a person acquitted of a criminal charge was able to write: You are quite right in thinking that expenses were greatly increased during the constant adjournments and muddles caused by the police's handling of the case. Will he give his attention to that aspect of the matter?

Mr. Butler

Yes, Sir. The last time I answered a Question on the subject I undertook to look into the matter and receive representations, and I will add that to the representations that I have received.