§
Lords Amendment: No. 1, in page 3, line 24, after "1957" insert:
or on a summary trial under section 49 of the Naval discipline Act, 1957".
§ 4.22 p.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Merlyn Rees)I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
When subsection (2)(a) was drafted no mention was made of persons sentenced by a naval commanding officer under Section 49 of the Naval Discipline Act, 1957. It was thought that such offenders were sentenced to short terms of detention, which they would not serve in prisons in this country. It is now known that it is the practice for them to be sent home to serve their sentences in civilian prisons. The Amendment is consequently little more than a drafting Amendment to remedy an omission from the Clause, which disenfranchises a convicted offender whilst he is serving his sentence in a penal institution—in effect, a prison.
§ Dr. Reginald Bennett (Gosport and Fareham)Is there a minimum sentence under such summary jurisdiction which is contemplated as being a disqualification?
§ Mr. ReesI understand that this is simply a question of whether the sentence is served in this country. This affects registration and whether a person has the right to vote. We had to make the Amendment because it was our original impression that such sentences under the Naval Discipline Act would be served 1822 abroad. The question is whether the sentences are being served in a prison in this country, as I understand some are.
§ Question put and agreed to.