HL Deb 20 January 1994 vol 551 cc718-20

3.22 p.m.

Lord Archer of Sandwell asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they have reached a conclusion on the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice that practising members of a religious sect or order who find jury service incompatible with their tenets or beliefs should be excused.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers)

My Lords, no conclusion has yet been reached.

Lord Archer of Sandwell

My Lords, leaving aside the merits of tolerating minorities, does the Minister believe that it can ever be conducive to justice to include in the jury someone who is reluctant to serve, who believes on principle that he should not be there, who is unhappy about discussing the case with other jurors and whose heart is not in the matter? Can there be any problem in deciding as a fact whether someone belongs sincerely to a group which holds that view?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, the noble and learned Lord makes a formidable case for that particular point of view, but as yet it is not clear who would be affected. Obviously we have to give this matter careful consideration. So far Her Majesty's Government have received only three representations on the Royal Commission's proposal and we need to be satisfied that those affected have had a proper opportunity to consider the issue. One of the difficulties is to define a religious sect or order and whether or not a person is a practising member of that sect or order.

Lord Morris

My Lords, in view of the fact that jury service is a duty and not a right or privilege, would my noble friend bear in mind when considering this matter that if people are excused on those grounds from doing jury service, they might be asked to suggest in what other way they can possibly serve the nation?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, that is going rather wider than jury service. Jury service obliges a person to serve on a jury. It does not oblige him to say, "Well, I would rather not, thank you very much, but shall I do something else".

Lord Lester of Herne Hill

My Lords, will the noble Earl bear in mind that the right to freedom of conscience in religion is anchored in Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and that to coerce someone to do service in the interests of the nation against their conscience might well breach that article?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, that is certainly one of the matters that my right honourable friend will take into account. As I explained earlier to your Lordships in answer to the Question, these matters are being considered but we have not as yet come to a conclusion.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, can the Minister give the House some idea of when the Government are likely to come to a conclusion? Will he bear in mind the fact that when this matter was discussed in another place (in 1988) the Minister said: it is important that I put these words on the record—that applications for excusal from jury service based on genuine conscientious scruples should be sensitively and sympathetically considered by the courts".—[Official Report, Commons, 20/6/88; col. 888.] Since then there has been a report from the Royal Commission. Having discussed various groups that may or may not be excluded, it states: On the other hand, where practising members of a religious sect or order find jury service to be incompatible with their tenets or beliefs, that should entitle them to be excused jury service and we recommend accordingly". That report was published last year. How long does it take to decide on such strong recommendations as those which we already have?

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, the noble Lord asks how much longer my right honourable friend will wish to consider the matter. He will realise that the Royal Commission made 352 recommendations. Of those recommendations 30 have been accepted and resolved. The Government will soon set out in detail our response to the remainder of the Royal Commission's report.