§ 2.56 p.m.
§ Lord MolloyMy 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 institute an inquiry to establish why vital evidence and 12 statements were not made available to the defence in the case of Mr. John Covill, who was tried at Stratford-on-Avon and received a jail sentence, but was subsequently cleared of all charges by an appeal court.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Belstead)My Lords, following the decision of the Court of Appeal to quash Mr. Covill's conviction, the Deputy Chief Constable of Warwickshire appointed a detective chief superintendent from another police force to conduct an investigation into the failure of the prosecution to supply certain statements to the defence. The investigation was concluded on 14th September this year. The investigating officer's report is now being considered by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who has been asked by the deputy chief constable to advise whether any criminal offence has been committed by any person connected with the prosecution of Mr. Covill.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, in thanking the noble Lord for that most informative reply, may I ask him to consider going a little further than chief constables or any aspect of police work, since this is a fundamental matter of jurisprudence? Would he not agree that the first duty of any prosecutor is not to obtain a prosecution, but to act as a minister of justice?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, it is for the reasons that the noble Lord has given to the House in his supplementary question that this is now a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to give advice upon.
Lord Paget of NorthamptonMy Lords, can the noble Lord tell us whether the statements were given to prosecuting counsel?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, I do not think that it would be proper for me to disclose the contents of the investigating officer's report, but I think I am right in saying that the fact that an investigation was needed was made clear at the time of the appeal. Certain statements had not been made available to the prosecution and therefore those witnesses had not been made available to the defence.
§ Lord Elwyn-JonesMy Lords, in serious cases does the Director of Public Prosecutions advise prosecutors to release to the defence statements not tendered at committal by the prosecution, but which may be of assistance in the conduct of the defence? Was that done in this case?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, my understanding of the general situation is that where the prosecution have taken a statement from a person whom they know can give material evidence, but they decide not to call him as a witness, they are under a legal duty to make him available as a witness for the defence. It was because it was apprehended, as a result of the hearing of the appeal, that that could not have been the case, that the police set up this special investigation.
§ Lord GardinerMy Lords, are we to take it that the report is not to be published, and if not, why not?
§ Lord BelsteadThat is so, my Lords. It is not normal for police investigation reports to be made public.