§ 2.45 p.m.
Viscount ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, I beg leave 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 request the courts and police to inform victims of crime of their right to claim compensation at the trial of the accused, to prevent them losing it through ignorance.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)My Lords, Section 35(1) of the Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 was deliberately framed, following a recommendation of the Advisory Council on the Penal System, so that the initiative in considering the question of compensation should rest with the court and not be left to an application by the victim. It remains the right of the victim, however, to make application to the criminal court for compensation or to institute civil proceedings against the offender, if he so wishes. We have no evidence to indicate that the criminal courts are failing to make compensation orders in appropriate cases: 3 on the contrary, statistics show that the courts are making increasing use of their wide power to make such orders.
Viscount ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for that very useful Answer. Is he aware that the reason why I put this Question on the Order Paper was that I had discovered two cases where compensation was required by the victims but they did not know that they had a right to it? They did not ask for it, and the court, being ignorant of their requirements, made no order. I have heard of a number of other people who could fall into the same trap if they found themselves in similar circumstances. Is it possible to give more emphasis to this matter so that the court will take cognisance of the fact that the victims may not know their rights and the court may not know what they require?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I am sorry to hear of the cases which the noble Viscount has put to me. The Home Office is sponsoring a research project into the experiences of victims in the criminal justice system to try to ensure precisely that, in the prosecution process, the legitimate interests of victims are not overlooked. Meanwhile, I think that, as a Government we are taking as much action as we possibly can to meet the noble Viscount's wishes. Last year, under the previous Government, 106,000 compensation orders were made, which was 10,000 more than in the previous year.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I follow up that point for a moment? While everybody appreciates that our magistrates are extremely useful, important and knowledgeable people, there are some cases in which it is not brought home at the court itself—and that is what the noble Viscount is referring to—that a person is entitled to compensation. This is really his point, so far as I can see it. If there are such cases as those to which he has referred, perhaps the Home Office will issue a circular or something of that nature to ask magistrates to point out that compensation may be claimed whenever a case of that description arises.
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, certainly I would not rule out the suggestion which the noble Lord has made. In addition to that—as the noble Lord well knows with his close connection with the Magistrates' Association—last year that Association sent out guidelines on compensation for cases of personal injury. May I come back to the main point in my reply to the noble Viscount. By statute, the initiative for awarding compensation lies with the court.