I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. He is absolutely right, in that I have complete confidence in the Diplock system and always have had. What we are talking about here is giving the DPP—I intend no criticism of the present incumbent—the huge discretion to decide whether or not a case goes, on his suspicion, to a non-jury trial. It would be much better if such cases were truly reviewable. In other words, if perchance the DPP went to a party at the Irish embassy and partook of too much intoxicating liquor and made a decision, it could not be challenged under the Bill that we are being asked to approve. It could be challenged only on grounds of dishonesty or bad faith. If the DPP were to be intoxicated—heaven forbid that should ever occur—or make an error of law or fact, the case in question could not be reviewed.
Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lady Hermon
(Ulster Unionist Party)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 13 December 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
454 c956 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:48:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365500
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365500
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365500