HC Deb 23 July 1980 vol 989 cc607-8 8.45 pm
Mr. Russell Johnston

I beg to move amendment No. 162, in page 13, leave out lines 13 to 15.

An identity parade may be held by the prosecution without having been viewed by witnesses who the defence consider should have been able to view the parade. It would be wrong if a fuller parade was denied. Under subsection (2) the sheriff is given discretion to refuse a parade if the prosecution parade has already been viewed by defence witnesses. Therefore if lines 13 to 15 were deleted the effectiveness of the Bill would not be reduced.

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Malcolm Rifkind)

The amendment should be considered in the context of the whole of clause 10, which for the first time provides important new rights for an accused person. Until now, if the prosecution has declined to hold an identification parade, an accused person has had no right to insist on one. Clause 10 gives the accused the right to apply to the court for an identification parade, even if the prosecution has refused to hold one. It also provides the accused with legal aid to ensure that it is a meaningful right.

The only scenario that the hon. Gentleman suggests in support of his amendment is where the prosecution has had an identification parade or declined to have one and the defence has already had one, and where subsequently a second identification parade is thought to be appropriate. He suggests that there may be new witnesses of importance. If an identification parade has been held and witnesses are brought forward who are considered important, in most cases the prosecution will be only too happy to have a second identification parade if there was a point of substance at stake. Even if the prosecution decline to do so, there is nothing to stop the accused at the trial using as defence witneses the persons who have come forward to identify or not identify the suspects involved.

Clause 10 provides an important right for the accused. If the prosecution has the right to have an identification parade and the accused has an identical right, with full legal aid, that is a reasonable balance, which meets the public interest. The clause does not prevent new witnesses being called as defence witnesses at any trial in the future. It is a sensible approach. I hope that on reflection the hon. Gentleman will feel able not to press his amendment.

Mr. Russell Johnston

In view of the Minister's remarks, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Forward to