HL Deb 30 June 1966 vol 275 cc778-80

3.16 p.m.

LORD CHORLEY

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

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they can state how widespread is the practice of challenging all the female members of juries impanelled to try indictments for driving motor vehicles while unfit through drink.]

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, we have no evidence that this practice is widespread.

LORD CHORLEY

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his Answer. I wonder whether he knows that over the past year in my own court of quarter sessions every woman juror in cases of this kind has been challenged, and I have heard that the same practice exists in other courts of quarter sessions in the North of England. Will the noble Lord make further inquiries and make quite sure that this practice is not becoming widespread?

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, I will most certainly make further inquiries, and I hope my noble friend will give me particulars of his own court. But before answering the Question I studied the Report of the Committee on Jury Service, of which the noble and learned Lord, Lord Morris of Borthy-y-Gest, was Chairman. In view of the strong opinions expressed on this subject, they had a substantial inquiry made covering the Central Criminal Court, the County of London Sessions, four circuits, including the Northern Circuit, and three major cities. In the Central Criminal Court during the period under review 1,693 jurors were empanelled, 118 juries were sworn to try cases, and in only 14 cases was there a peremptory challenge by the defence. Fifteen women were affected. They were in 7 cases, and in 5 of these it seemed likely that the intention was to obtain an all-male jury. In these 5 cases the charges were grievous bodily harm, robbery of an elderly female with violence, shooting by a woman with intent to murder her lover, rape and sexual intercourse with a girl under sixteen, and drunk in charge and dangerous driving was the charge in only one. It seems that, although this is a serious matter, inquiry has been made and there is no evidence to show that it is widespread.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend if this practice is not opposed to all the democratic principles?

LORD STONHAM

In my view it is directly opposed to all democratic principles, and indeed the Morris Committee, to which I have just referred, have carefully considered this. It is their view—and I quote—that People who serve on juries should do so because they are citizens and without regard to their sex. And the recommendations they make will be calculated to increase the number of women on juries and there should be no differentiation.

LORD DERWENT

My Lords, can the noble Lord say what connection democracy has with challenging a juror?

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, I would have thought the proper conduct of cases in court was of the very essence of democracy.

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, would not this difficulty be overcome by a simple amendment of the 1962 Act to remove the right to trial by jury in such cases?

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, I think that is slightly outside the Question.

LORD FRASER OF LONSDALE

My Lords, if women were protected from being challenged in some way they would not be equal, unless of course they were more equal.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, that was entirely what my noble friend Lady Summerskill had in mind, and the Morris Committee, and I agree.

LORD CHORLEY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord to make rather more widespread inquiries? The Morris Report, while it is encouraging as far as it goes, is based on a rather small amount of evidence. Does the noble Lord not know that what is done in the North of England to-day will be done in the South to-morrow, and no doubt before long counsel in the Central Criminal Court will be following the practice of counsel appearing in my court of quarter sessions?

LORD STONHAM

I pointed out that the inquiry instituted by the Morris Committee covered the Northern Circuit. I will inquire further. Frankly, the only such case I know of was one where the defendant, a married man, said he was not drunk but had visited his mistress and was very tired, and his legal adviser felt that defence was unlikely to appeal to a female jury.