§ 23. Mr. MansTo ask the Attorney-General what steps are being taken to improve the effectiveness of the Serious Fraud Office.
§ The Attorney-General (Sir Nicholas Lyell)The Serious Fraud Office keeps its working procedures under review with a stocktaking after each case. The Government are also considering important recommendations by the Royal Commission on criminal justice, including the case for more detailed advance disclosure by the defence.
§ Mr. MansDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, where possible, defence counsel should give a clear indication of their line of defence at the beginning of trials, in their opening statements, so that juries do not have to wait many months to find out?
§ The Attorney-GeneralMy hon. Friend has picked up an important point, which was made by the royal commission itself: once the defendant knows precisely what case he must meet, it is right that he should give a sufficient indication of his defence so that the jury knows at the outset what issues are to be tried and to be decided by it, rather than having to wait for many weeks—sometimes months—to find out.
§ Mr. BerminghamDoes the Attorney-General agree that the problem with the Serious Fraud Office has always been the over-complicated indictments that it prefers? Should it not simplify those indictments, and go for the simple, main criteria of criminality?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe problem that is always faced in such complex cases is to prefer the right charges so as to focus on the true criminality without either over-complicating the issue or so narrowing the focus that 14 justice cannot be done. The Serious Fraud Office has made great improvements in recent years in this matter, as its conviction record shows.