HC Deb 02 April 1979 vol 965 cc932-4
44. Mr. Adley

asked the Attorney-General if his noble Friend will call a conference of magistrates to discuss sentencing policy on shoplifting.

The Solicitor-General (Mr. Peter Archer)

Sentencing conferences and exercises for magistrates are held periodically. Most of these are convened locally and all magistrates in the area are invited to attend. Particular attention has been given to crimes involving theft from shops and stores and there have been not less than six sentencing conferences entirely devoted to that subject since January' 1978. My noble Friend regards the present arrangements as satisfactory and sees no reason to convene a special conference of the kind suggested.

Mr. Adley

I thank the Minister for that reply, and I recognise that the spread of self-service trading has caused an increase in shoplifting. However, does the Solicitor-General agree that it is incumbent upon the courts to satisfy themselves that a person who is on a shoplifting charge was there with the deliberate intention of stealing, rather than regarding the offence as a by-product of the trading methods of the stores, which is one of the main causes of the increase in shoplifting?

The Solicitor-General

An element of dishonesty is an essential element in the offence. I think that the courts are well aware of that.

The trading methods of stores is not a matter for my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, but I see that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is present, and he will have heard what the hon. Gentleman said.

Mr. Cryer

Will my right hon. and learned Friend discuss with the Magistrates' Association the question of the principle that if a prosecution fails costs should be awarded to the person who has been accused but has been shown to be innocent? Will he accept that there are matters of concern, such as that in the case of a constituent of mine who pleaded not guilty to a motoring offence, when he might have been fined £20 or £30, and finished up with costs of over £70 for the representation that he had, and costs were not given on that occasion? The feeling of the solicitors concerned was that the bench would not have awarded costs.

The Solicitor-General

The question of costs in criminal cases following an acquittal has given rise to problems from time to time. I shall invite the attention of my noble Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to what my hon. Friend has said.

Sir Anthony Meyer

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman suggest to magistrates that a material consideration should be whether the store is prosecuting with or without the approval or the agreement of the police?

The Solicitor-General

It is not a principle of criminal law in this country that the intervention of the police is an essential factor in the offence. I hope the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that the absence of the police would necessarily be a reason for the court to come to a particular conclusion as to guilt or innocence.

Mr. Greville Janner

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that what worries very many of us is that so many prosecutions for shoplifting and so-called petty theft are private prosecutions which do not require the intervention of the police or of anyone else, that many of them, quite rightly, lead to acquittals and that it is not merely a question of costs not being awarded but of the innocent party being destroyed by the fact that the prosecution was brought at all when it never should have been brought?

The Solicitor-General

It has normally been regarded as an important constitutional principle that the individual is entitled, as a general rule, to bring criminal proceedings.

Mr. Lee

Hear, hear.

The Solicitor-General

I think that it would be rather a dangerous principle to suggest that only the authorities—only the police or only the Director—were entitled to do so.