HL Deb 28 January 1980 vol 404 cc606-9

2.53 p.m.

Lord WIGODER

My 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 have any proposals for preserving the confidentiality of the jury room.

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor would have liked to answer this Question. He is at this moment sitting on your Lordships' Appellate Committee in place of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wilberforce, who is indisposed. He has asked me to express his regrets to the House.

My Lords, the Government are considering the implications of the recent judgment of the Divisional Court in the case of the Attorney-General v.Statesman & Nation Publishing Company in which the law on this subject was considered. They have not yet reached any conclusions.

Lord WIGODER

My Lords, while I accept that Answer in the spirit in which it is offered, may I ask the noble Lord the Minister whether he would agree that it is of vital importance to the administration of justice that jurors should feel free in the jury room to express their opinions frankly and without fearing that they may subsequently be reported in the Press?

Lord BELSTEAD

Yes, my Lords,

Lord HALE

. My Lords, does the noble Lord recall the very famous case of Adelaide Bartlett, who was charged with murdering her husband by administering chloroform, which was said to be medically impossible? After a long trial, the jury, following a long retirement, were permitted to bring in an addendum to their verdict of acquittal, in which they said that there was very grave suspicion. After all the intellectual newspapers had gone out of their way to say that it was a bad verdict and that the lady was guilty, the foreman of the jury wrote a letter, which was published in The Times, which was almost conclusive and which said that 11 were for an acquittal the moment they got inside the jury room, but that one man had said that nothing would deter him from voting for conviction. They finally agreed to this highly improper compromise in an effort to save the innocent lady from the ordeal of six days more trial, which they did not think her health was likely to stand. I know of no authority to say that a juryman is not entitled to explain himself or his action decently and properly when he is under attack and attack is permitted.

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, I think that I can best reply to the noble Lord by saying that, as I understand the judgment of the Lord Chief Justice in relation to the particular case about which the noble Lord, Lord Wigoder, is questioning me, he was of the view that there were dangers in the revealing of jury secrets in that it might deter subsequent juries from speaking their mind in the jury room because of the fear of publicity afterwards. It could also imperil the finality of jury verdicts which, as I understand the Lord Chief Justice's words, was a prime reason for jury trial in this country. Bearing in mind those conclusions of the Lord Chief Justice, the Government think it undesirable in principle that jurors should be free to disclose the secrets of their deliberations. Discussions will be taking place with interested parties in order to decide what course the Government should best take.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, the Minister will be glad to hear that this is a genuine request for information, with no backlash to it at all. Can he kindly tell the House what exactly is the position of a juror who betrays to other people conversations that took place in the jury room? What is the authority, what is the law, and whence is it derived?

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, there is no oath of secrecy; therefore it is not an offence.

Lord ELWYN-JONES

My Lords, in view of the great importance of this matter, will the Government consider referring it to one of the expert committees which might be able to give advice on it? I do not mean that impertinently.

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, I must say to the noble and learned Lord that I shall draw the attention of my right honourable and noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor to what he has said. I was at pains to explain that it is the view of the Government at the moment that the way to proceed is by discussion with all the various interested parties—and the noble and learned Lord will understand the scope of that phrase better than I. As the noble and learned Lord has put this particular point to me, I should like to draw the Lord Chancellor's attention to it.

Lord HUTCHINSON of LULLING-TON

My Lords, will the noble Lord agree that the essence of the verdict of a jury is that it is reached by a consensus of 12 people who have listened to the evidence and that therefore to try to discover by interviewing one member of a jury how that consensus has been reached is inevitably bound to give rise to misconception? Will the Minister also agree that, whereas the good sense of the ordinary juryman can be relied upon in relation to the secrets of the jury room, it might be fruitful to consider whether it should be an offence to publish the secrets of the jury room?

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, with his experience, for giving me his views on the first point. I think that the view that he expressed supports the view that I have attempted to express, which is the Government's view today, and which is that it is undesirable in principle that jurors should be free to disclose the secrets of their deliberations. On the noble Lord's second point, again, if I may, I should like to draw the attention of my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor to what the noble Lord has said.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, if the oath of secrecy involves a sanction to uphold the privacy of matters which take place in the jury room, is that sanction, then, for the juror who betrays what happens in the jury room, liability to prosecution for perjury, or what?

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, I do not think I made myself heard to the noble Baroness. As I understand it, there is no oath of secrecy in the juror's oath.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Lord. Then what is the sanction against the juror who talks?

Lord BELSTEAD

My Lords, there is not one.