§ Mr. RandallI beg to move amendment No. 68, in page 3, line 21 insert—
'(d) take into account any reparation made by the offender.'.In recent legislation, attention has rightly been given to holding offenders accountable by requiring them to make reparations for their offences through compensation orders and community service orders. The Criminal Justice Act 1982 also allows courts to take account of reparations made during deferment of sentence. The amendment would extend the principle to give offenders an opportunity and an incentive to make reparation even before the case comes to court.We believe that this could be done in the framework of a reparation projection. Those projects have been shown, in Home Office research, to be widely welcomed by victims who have taken part in them. A similar amendment debated in Committee was not accepted by the Government on the ground that its terms were already covered by clause 3. It is submitted, however, that the argument is based on a misconception of the nature of reparation. When the Bill refers to the offender's attitude to the offence and to his physical and mental condition, those are traditional criteria related to mitigation of sentence or to the choice of a rehabilitative sentence. Reparation, however is a different concept because it is based not solely on measures imposed on the offender but on the impact on the victim.
Some reparation projects go further and provide for mediation between victim and offender, provided that both are willing. That can be beneficial to victims and offenders. The amendment is intended to draw the attention of courts to the distinction and to encourage them to take account of any efforts by an offender to make amends to the victim. It would also allow the reparation to be done much sooner.
§ Mr. John PattenIt is common ground between us that if an offender has made or is willing to make reparation for his offence, for example, by returning stolen property or making good criminal damage, he should get credit for that. It is our intention that that should be capable of being taken into account under clause 3(1)(b). The issue was raised earlier by my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, North-West (Mr. Malins) in relation to mitigating and aggravating factors. The court should regard it as a factor in mitigation if the offender has made reparation or is willing to make it.
I think that the point is already covered, but I have listened to what the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West has said, and between now and when the Bill is dealt with in another place I will consider further whether it yet provides adequately for mitigation generally. An important point is involved; I do not dissent from that. I shall certainly bear in mind in doing so what the hon. Gentleman has said.
My consideration will also cover the point about credit for time spent in custody abroad when awaiting extradition which exercises the right hon. and learned 401 Member for Warley, West (Mr. Archer). The matter was discussed by him and by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State on new clause 12.
I hope that, having heard those kindly words, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West will withdraw the amendment immediately.
§ Mr. RandallAgain I am terribly disappointed, although that was the most positive reply that we have had from the Minister in Committee or on Report. I am sure that their Lordships will note the words of the Minister and I hope that there will be a string of superb amendments based on the one that we have constructed, so that this provision may be included in the legislation. With that, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.