HC Deb 23 February 1977 vol 926 cc1407-8
41. Mr. Rifkind

asked the Lord Advocate whether he is satisfied with the appellate procedure available to persons convicted of summary offences.

The Lord Advocate

I am aware of criticisms that have been made about the limited scope of the summary appeal procedure and I consider that some of these may have some justification. This, however, is presently being considered by the Thomson Committee and I do not consider it appropriate to anticipate any recommendations that it may make in regard to summary appeal procedure.

Mr. Rifkind

Does the Lord Advocate accept that persons convicted in magistrates' courts in England and Wales can appeal for a new trial and that this has often led to convictions being quashed? Is he aware that in Scotland one can appeal from summary convictions only on matters of law, that this position is unsatisfactory and that in many cases it has led to grave feelings of injustice?

The Lord Advocate

The hon. Gentleman has pinpointed an area in which there is a great deal of dissatisfaction that I share. In England there is a right of appeal in summary cases, under certain conditions, for a retrial. In Scotland there are two options. One is a limited right of retrial and the other is a radical change in the stated case procedure. I do not want to commit myself to saying which procedure is better, but there is much to be said for the former.

Mr. Corrie

Is the Lord Advocate happy with a situation in which one cannot appeal against a judgment in the High Court on bail procedure, and whereby someone can be let out on a small sum of bail and commit offences, of the kind for which he has been indicted, before his trial comes up? Is the situation the same in England?

The Lord Advocate

I do not know about the situation in England, but in Scotland there is only a limited right of appeal by the Crown in any criminal case. In the case of indictments there is virtually no room for Crown appeal, and in the matter of bail that sometimes leads to rather extraordinary results.

Mr. Fairbairn

The Lord Advocate has wisely and generously admitted the shortcomings in the limitation on summary appeal procedure, but pending the report of the Thomson Committee and its recommendations cannot he suggest that there are sections in the Act that could be used to advantage by the Appeal Court in the meantime to go back to the original court?

The Lord Advocate

I take note of that suggestion.