§ 44. Mr. Fletcherasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will now give an assurance that, in connection with the review now being conducted by Her Majesty's 906 judges of the Judges' Rules, those desirous of making representations on the subject will have an opportunity of doing so; and what procedure is contemplated for this purpose.
§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. David Renton)Yes, Sir. As my right hon. Friend undertook in his reply to the hon. Member on 30th March, he has been in touch with the Lord Chief Justice. The Lord Chief Justice has authorised my right hon. Friend to say that while the judges—who have themselves the widest experience of the operation of the existing Rules—do not propose to invite evidence, they will take account of any representations which may be made to them in writing, through the Secretary to the Lord Chief Justice at the Royal Courts of Justice.
§ Mr. FletcherWhile appreciating that reply, may I ask the Joint Undersecretary to consider the desirability of people who so desire making verbal representations to the judges, in the same way as they would have been able to do if this matter had been left within the purview of the Royal Commission on the Police?
§ Mr. RentonNo, this would not have been appropriate. This is not a public inquiry. It is the desire of, my right hon. Friend to obtain the opinion of the judges about this matter in the light of their own very great experience, but if anybody has any information which he thinks may be of help to the judges and delivers it to them in writing, the judges will be glad to consider it.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanIs the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that this matter has certain urgency and is of very wide public interest? Has his attention been called, for instance, to a recent capital case in which the defendants were ultimately acquitted, in which a principal police officer confessed in the witness box, and defended his action, that he had refused to allow the defendants' solicitor or counsel to interview them except in his presence? Does this not show a very wide ignorance of what even the existing Rules are?
§ Mr. RentonI should have thought that we could safely assume that the judges will not ignore that case.