Paul Burrell (Hansard, 7 November 2002)

§ Ian Lucas
To ask the Solicitor-General what discussions her Department had in the case of Regina v. Paul Burrell with the Crown Prosecution Service concerning the making of an application for a public interest immunity certificate. [79838]

§ The Solicitor-General
No such discussions took place. There was never any question of continuing with the prosecution while withholding disclosure of the information and no attempt was made to do so. No Minister was asked to give a PII certificate or signed one, nor was a draft certificate ever prepared, nor was any consideration given by anyone to preparing such a certificate to place before the judge. The judge agreed to postpone the disclosure of the information in the public interest until further enquiries had been carried out and a fuller picture obtained so as to enable properly informed decisions to be made, in particular as to the future conduct of the trial.

§ Mrs. Ellman
To ask the Solicitor-General, if she will investigate the circumstances surrounding the decision of the CPS to prosecute Paul Burrell; and what the cost of the action was to public funds. [79845]

§ The Solicitor-General
On the information known to the Crown Prosecution Service at the time of the decision last year to bring a prosecution, I have no reason to doubt the assessment made that there was a realistic prospect of securing a conviction and that the public interest was in favour of a prosecution. The cost of the prosecution to public funds has not yet been ascertained.

§ Mrs. Ellman
To ask the Solicitor-General, if she will undertake an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the collapse of the court case Regina v. Paul Burrell. [79847]
736W

§ The Solicitor-General
A full statement was made by the prosecution and the facts of the case are already known. A copy of the statement has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. The Crown Prosecution Service will be considering carefully the lessons of what happened but, as the Prime Minister has stated, there is no need for an inquiry. This was a unique set of circumstances.

§ Llew Smith
To ask the Solicitor General, what plans she has to review the procedure for issuing public interest immunity certificates. [80095]

§ The Solicitor-General
None.

§ Mr. Hawkins
To ask the Solicitor-General, which Ministers signed PII certificates in the case of Reginav. Burrell; and which categories of information these certificates covered. [79843]

§ The Solicitor-General
No Minister was asked to give a PII certificate or signed one, nor was a draft certificate ever prepared, nor was any consideration given by anyone to preparing such a certificate to place before the judge.

§ Ann Clwyd
To ask the Solicitor-General, if she will make a statement on the discussions between the Attorney-General and the Director of Public Prosecutions about the prosecution of Paul Burrell prior to the decision to end the case; and when he first discussed the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions to end the case against Paul Burrell. [80059]

§ The Solicitor-General
The Attorney-General first learnt about the case shortly after his appointment. The Director of Public Prosecutions had drawn the case to the attention of his predecessor in May last year. Thereafter, the case was included in a list of high profile cases in respect of which brief reports are provided to Law Officers on a monthly basis. The Law Officers were not asked for and did not give their views about whether the case should proceed. On Tuesday last week, the Crown Prosecution Service and prosecution counsel drew the attention of the Attorney-General to the new information that had been disclosed by the Palace to the police. Naturally, the Attorney-General's views were sought on how to proceed in the light of that development and he gave them. But in the end, as he made plain should be the case, the decision was made by the CPS following further consideration and having taken leading counsel's advice. At the time that decisions were made, the Director of Public Prosecutions was abroad. He kept in close touch with his office and approved the decision, but there were no direct discussions between the Attorney-General and the Director of Public Prosecutions. They first spoke directly of the matter on 3 November.