HL Deb 27 October 1982 vol 435 cc574-5

35 After Clause 57, insert the following clause:

"Consents to prosecutions under Explosive Substances Act 1883. 1883 c.3.

Explosive substances—consents to prosecutions

(1) The following subsection shall be substituted for section 7(1) of the Explosive Substances Act 1883. (1) Proceedings for a crime under this Act shall not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Attorney General.".

(2) In section 9(2) of that Act (application to Scotland) the following paragraph shall be inserted before the paragraph relating to the expression "Attorney General"— Section 7(1) shall be omitted.".".

The Lord Chancellor

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 35. Under the Explosive Substances Act prosecutions for offences can be brought only with the consent of the Attorney General, but the procedure for his giving consent is, I am told, at present cumbersome. I am also told that this amendment will simplify it. Never having held that high legal office I cannot really add much more to my brief in this respect.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendment.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

Lord Mishcon

My Lords, I shall detain the House, I promise, for only a few moments. It is interesting to notice how things become somewhat onerous, arduous, and subject to criticism when we are not very careful about our legislation. The position is terrifically odd under the Explosive Substances Act. What has happened until now—this arose recently before a magistrate who himself did not know what this procedure was—was that if a charge was to be brought under this Act a charge had to be brought first in the court before the Attorney General's fiat was applied for. This meant in effect that the Director of Public Prosecutions would not wish to prefer the charge until he knew that the Attorney General was likely to grant his fiat. That would mean that he would consult with the Attorney General and the Attorney General would say that it was likely, or not likely. If it was likely, the charge would be preferred.

After the charge had been preferred and came before the magistrates the whole procedure would then have to he gone into of applying for the fiat of the Attorney General all over again, with all the forms that have to be completed in that connection. Now this procedure, as the noble and learned Lord in his usual summarising, lucid manner explained will be this: there will he uniform practice, and sensibly the Attorney General's fiat will be sought immediately that the Director of Public Prosecutions is considering the question of a charge. It will then be given, or not given, and the procedure will be uniform and simple.

The Lord Chancellor

My Lords I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon. He is evidently fully briefed on this subject, and I am glad that he agrees with me.

On Question, Motion agreed to.