Serious Crime Bill [HL]

moved AmendmentNo. 37: 37: Clause 33, page 22, line 19, at end insert— ““(3) Notwithstanding this, the rules on admissibility of evidence to be observed in such proceedings shall be the same as those observed in trials on indictment; and no person shall be required in such proceedings to answer any question or to produce any document which he could not be required to answer or produce in similar proceedings in a trial on indictment.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, I referred earlier to the fair trial provisions, which in my view willbe held to apply to proceedings of this nature. I mentioned two matters: the standard of proof and the admissibility of hearsay evidence. I start by saying that in the case of McCann the House of Lords, while holding that the civil standard of proof for ASBOs should be virtually the same as that in criminal proceedings, nevertheless permitted the use of hearsay evidence in obtaining anti-social behaviour orders. However, we are not dealing with those orders here but with serious crime, and very serious crimeas set out in the schedule that we discussed amoment ago. The two amendments propose that in the applications that will be made by prosecutors for serious crime orders, while the standard of proof should be high, in addition to that the rules as to admissibility of evidence to be observed in such proceedings shall be the same as those observed in trial on indictment. That same provision would apply not only to proceedings in the High Court that start without a criminal conviction but also to proceedings in the Crown Court when the application is made for an order following a conviction. In both instances, we submit that the proper way to prove involvement in serious crime is by proper evidence and not by hearsay evidence, as proposed in the Bill. The Prime Minister said in a speech to the Labour Party conference some years ago that the hearsay rule is an outdated relic of Dickens’ England. That is a very surprising remark coming from that source; it is not a relic but a living principle applied in every criminal court in this country. I beg to move.