COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 27 October 1982)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I beg to move that the House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendment. I should explain that originally this amendment was an Opposition amendment in another place, but my learned friend the Minister of State at the Home Office thought that is was an improvement and recommended its acceptance. Likewise, I commend it to your Lordships.
The position is that under Section 13(2) of the Coroners (Amendment) Act 1926 it is provided that a coroner shall summon a jury if it appears to him: either before he proceeds to hold an inquest or in the course of an inquest begun without a jury, that there is reason to suspect ... that the death occurred…". Then the subsection sets out in (a) to (e) the circumstances in which it applies. This provision adds after (a) to (e), paragraph (f), which reads: that the death occurred while the deceased was in police custody, or resulted from an injury caused by a police officer in the purported execution of his duty". My right honourable friend the Home Secretary repeated last year to coroners advice originally given by the then Home Secretary in 1969, that it is desirable for an inquest to be held in every case of a person dying in legal custody, including police custody, and that such an inquest should preferably be held with a jury. This amendment gives that advice in a new and now statutory form, if it is passed.
Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendment.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

§ Lord Mishcon
My Lords, I had a distinct impression—I may he completely wrong—that the noble and learned Lord was encouraging me to be brief, and therefore I intend to accept that encouragement. I merely wish to say that the noble and learned Lord has graciously said that this was an Opposition amendment in another place and that the Government had been good enough to accept it. There have been cases within the memory of all your Lordships in recent years which have caused grave anxiety where death or a severe injury has occurred while someone has been in custody. It is proper that it should now be part of the law of the land that in such cases where a death occurs a jury should be present 574 when the coroner is conducting his inquest. We obviously concur with this amendment which had its origin in the Opposition in the other place.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, having had the responsibility of piloting the Coroners Act 1981 during its stages in your Lordships' House, may I say that I heartily welcome this new development.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I am very grateful indeed to both noble Lords for welcoming this amendment. I was not in any way seeking to encourage the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, to curtail his remarks. It is always a delight to listen to him. But, at this particular hour of the day, I think it is an added delight when they are reasonably brief.