HL Deb 11 June 1959 vol 216 cc978-80

3.19 p.m.

LORD MILNER OF LEEDS

My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will give (a) the number of cases in the Metropolitan Police area during the year 1958 where a verdict of not guilty was given, and (b) the number of such cases in which costs were awarded against the police.]

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, where a person is acquitted on indictment the court has power under Section 2 (2) of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1952, in a limited class of cases to order the prosecutor to pay the whole or any part of the costs incurred in the defence; the court also has a general power under Section 1 (1) (b) of that Act to order the payment of the costs of the defence out of local funds. In 1958 870 persons were acquitted by Courts of Assize or Quarter Sessions on charges preferred by the Metropolitan Police. No orders were made against the police under Section 2 (2) of the Act. I regret that information about the number of cases in which an order was made under Section 1 (1) (b) of the Act is not available.

LORD MILNER OF LEEDS

Is that not a very unsatisfactory position, in that in one class of case (I gather 800 in number) not a single order was made for payment of costs by the prosecution; and in the other category no figures are available? Are noble Lords to understand that the Metropolitan Police do not keep a complete record of the number of cases or the amounts in respect of those cases where costs are awarded against them?

LORD CHESHAM

No, my Lords. The Metropolitan Police do keep such records, and that is how I am able to give him the figure for which he asked. I added the other one—that is, the cases where costs may have been ordered to be paid out of public funds; which is, of course, nothing to do with the Metropolitan Police—hoping to assist the noble Lord by giving him some further information.

LORD MESTON

Will the noble Lord, or one of his colleagues, kindly tell the House what is the exact phraseology of the presumption of innocence?

LORD CHESHAM

If the noble Lord would put down a Question, no doubt we should be delighted to do so.

LORD OGMORE

When the noble Lord refers to "public funds", is he alluding to the funds of some other Government Department involved or to a local authority fund, such as that of the London County Council?

LORD CHESHAM

It is the local authority fund involved.

LORD MILNER OF LEEDS

Does the noble Lord not appreciate that in each of the 800 acquittals he mentioned, where not a single innocent defendant was given costs, the defendant probably spent large sums in proving his innocence in the eyes of the law, and that probably other serious consequences may have occurred to him? And have the Government no proposal to make in regard to this matter?

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, it is a matter which is entirely within the jurisdiction of the courts within the framework provided by the law. What I told the noble Lord to start with, in answer to his Question, is the law as it stands at the moment. It is a matter for the courts, not for the Government, to decide whether or not costs should be allowed in any individual case.

LORD MILNER OF LEEDS

May I ask the noble Lord whether it is not a fact that the Home Office have issued a circular advising the courts as to the cases in which they ought or ought not to award costs?

LORD CHESHAM

If the noble Lord is referring to the circular of 1948, the answer is, No, my Lords. The noble Lord was good enough to give me notice in advance of his interest in this circular. I can trace no circular from the Home Office on this subject which was issued in 1952. I think perhaps there was confusion in the source of his information, over a statement that was made publicly at that time by the then Lord Chief Justice, Lord Goddard. The circular on the matter was, in fact, issued in 1948, and draws the attention of courts to the provision of the Act in the normal way. It was issued, I may say, with the full approval of the judges and of the Attorney-General of the Government at the time.

LORD MILNER OF LEEDS

I am obliged to the noble Lord. I may raise this question again on a future occasion.