HL Deb 11 December 1989 vol 513 cc1123-4

2.49 p.m

Lord Molloy asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will now bring the law of England and Wales regarding confessions into line with Scottish law, in the light of the miscarriage of justice concerning the Guildford Four.

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, the Government will consider whether any changes of law or practice need to be made in the light of the recommendations of the judicial inquiry presided over by Sir John May.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, is he aware that as a Member of the other place, I was involved in the Timothy Evans case? He was hanged for confessing to a crime which he did not commit and he was later pardoned. Can the Minister say whether or not Scottish lawyers will be involved in the examination being carried out by the Government? Will those who are examining make sure that they contact and listen to the views of the lawyers in Scotland?

Viscount Ullswater

Yes, my Lords. Under English common law and since 1984 under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of that year, before a confession can be heard in evidence the prosecution has to satisfy a court that it has been obtained without oppression and not in circumstances which would otherwise render it unreliable. This was on a recommendation of the Criminal Law Revision Committee, which, at the time it reported, had the Scottish law available to examine. I repeat that the inquiry has been framed wide enough to allow it to consider any questions of law or fact arising from the investigation, trial or conviction.

Lord Campbell of Alloway

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the exercise of the power of the Home Secretary to refer to the Court of Appeal for a re-hearing under Section 17 of the 1968 Act is not wholly satisfactory? Does the Minister agree that, without a full transcript of the proceedings at the trial, the powers of the Court of Appeal are unduly and unfairly limited? Finally, does he further agree that convictions, particularly for murder, uncorroborated but contested, are wholly unsafe?

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, I believe that the matters raised by my noble friend will be subject to very careful scrutiny by Sir John May. In those circumstances it would not be wise for me to offer any comment at this stage.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that lawyers in England, Wales and Scotland are still somewhat apprehensive of the functions of PACE?

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, again I believe that matter will be looked at by the inquiry under Sir John May.

Lord Mishcon

My Lords, does the Minister agree that when a Statement was made in this House on the critical situation which had arisen as a result of discoveries as to how the Guildford Four were wrongly convicted, there was a clear voice in this House calling for the reform mentioned in this Question? Will the Minister explain to the House why we have to wait until the inquiry chaired by Sir John May reports in 1991 as to what happened in that specific case of the Guildford Four? Why do we have to wait for that report in order to have precisely the same law as Scotland has so satisfactorily?

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, I believe the difficulty is that the inquiry will have to adjourn while the criminal investigation into the actions of the police officers is being carried out by the Avon and Somerset Constabulary. That was made clear on the opening day of the inquiry on 4th December. However, Sir John May said that he would inquire into some of the more theoretical aspects of the inquiry. To that end he proposes to invite submissions on questions of law, evidence and procedure from interested bodies.

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the real difficulty is that the case referred to in the Question was exonerated by the Court of Appeal on the basis that evidence was likely to have been fabricated? Does the Minister further agree that we should remember that it is just as easy to fabricate evidence of corroboration as it is to fabricate evidence of confessions?

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, my noble and learned friend brings out one of the most important facts. I feel that I should not comment any more about the scope of the Sir John May inquiry, but I am quite certain that he will be looking into those facts.

Baroness Phillips

My Lords, is the Minister aware that many of us admire the way in which our police will inquire into matters and discipline themselves, which is surely a unique situation throughout the world?

Viscount Ullswater

Yes, my Lords, and I am very happy to agree. I believe that the police force has an extremely high reputation in this country.

Lord Mishcon

My Lords, is the Minister aware that I did not ask the question to which he gave a most courteous answer? I was not inquiring as to why it was taking so long for Sir John May to report. I asked the Minister whether we had to wait until 1991 before considering a general principle of law which is in Scottish law. Why do we have to wait for that report before dealing with the matter?

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, it is because I believe that is one of the fundamental matters that Sir John May will be examining in his inquiry.