§ Andrew MackinlayTo ask the Solicitor-General if she will make a statement on the circumstances in which major trials have been delayed recently owing to commitment of Counsel to other cases for which they have agreed to be instructed which are listed at the same time. [24153]
§ The Solicitor-GeneralIt is important that major trials are conducted expeditiously in the interests of justice. Decisions as to the timing of trials are for the judges to determine, bearing in mind the representations that they receive. I am aware of the case to which this question refers, the name of which I am omitting since the matter 309W is sub judice; however, I hope that the following information will be of assistance. The trial was originally fixed to commence on 2 October 2001. Application was made on behalf of one defendant for that date to be vacated due to serious illness rendering him unfit to stand trial. The matter was investigated by the Crown Prosecution Service and an independent medical report confirmed the position.
The case was therefore listed again before the trial judge to fix a new date. At this hearing it was clear that the first defendant would not be fit for trial for a period of six months. All parties, prosecution and the four defendants, were agreed that it was in the interests of justice that all should be tried together. However, when Counsel for the Crown sought a listing on the first available date in April 2002, six months ahead, Counsel for another defendant opposed this, on the grounds that neither he nor his junior, who had represented their client from the first appearance before the Crown court, would be available until the end of October 2002, and it would be unjust to deprive him of both counsel in those circumstances.
The Counsel for the prosecution opposed a delay of this length. In the event, the trial judge, having accepted that a delay until April was unavoidable because of the first defendant's illness and having weighed all the competing interests, ruled, with, she said, great reluctance, that the trial should be fixed for 4 November 2002.
One defendant involved in these proceedings is already serving a sentence of imprisonment having been convicted following an earlier linked trial.