HC Deb 15 December 1988 vol 143 cc1068-9
3. Mr. Bernie Grant

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he intends to respond to the second report from Lord Gifford QC into the circumstances that led to the convictions of Mr. Silcott, Mr. Braithwaite and Mr. Raghip arising out of the incidents at Broadwater farm in 1985; and if he will make a statement on its conclusions.

Mr. Douglas Hogg

Lord Gifford has written to me enclosing a copy of his report. This was an entirely unofficial exercise in which, with my right hon. Friend's approval, the Metropolitan police declined to take part.

Mr. Grant

Is the Home Secretary satisfied that the evidence on which the Broadwater farm three were convicted and on which their petition for leave to appeal was rejected, which is of confessions only, was obtained without undue duress, without unfair treatment, and under the provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984? Have inquiries been made into the evidence that was obtained? If inquiries have not been made, will he make them now?

Mr. Hogg

The three men named in the question were convicted after a jury trial. That conviction was upheld in the Court of Appeal earlier this week. In those circumstances, I believe that most fair-minded people should accept that those men are guilty as charged.

Mr. Roger King

Will my hon. Friend join in congratulating those Metropolitan police officers who were recently awarded bravery awards for their heroic conduct during the Broadwater farm riots in 1987?

Mr. Hogg

The Metropolitan police behaved with great gallantry, and they will be grateful to my hon. Friend for his words.

Mr. Hattersley

I do not contest the idea that legal procedures, as now constituted, were scrupulously followed in this case, but will the Under-Secretary comment on the increasing disquiet that underlies this case, of men and women being convicted on confessions alone? There is growing concern that that should not be the sole reason for a conviction. Is the Department prepared to study that matter?

Mr. Hogg

These matters are for the courts. The right hon. Gentleman would do his reputation, and that of his party, considerable good if he stood by the verdict of a jury when it is upheld in the Court of Appeal. Simply to try to go around the back door in such cases is not respectable.