I was explaining why it would be asking too much to expect the Director of Public Prosecutions to be satisfied that there was an impairment to justice given the need to have evidence—of which there is very little—to support such a judgment. He would have to make a judgment in the round, considering a number of different factors that together indicated a risk that the administration of justice might be impaired. It would inevitably be difficult to find information that would meet the higher test proposed by some of these amendments.
I shall refer to the specific points put before I address the final amendment in the group. I was asked by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mayhew of Twysden, whether I could give other examples of the word ““suspects”” and, if I recollect rightly, the concept of risk, being used in statute. I cannot do that now, even having had the interval of the Division—what I think is called in another place a short adjournment. However, I shall ensure that we look into that and try to write to the noble and learned Lord about it before Report.
Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Goldsmith
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c116GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:46:15 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385890
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385890
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385890