moved Amendment No. 4:
4: Clause 1, page 6, line 27, leave out ““or””
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 5. These amendments make changes to Section 63J, which provides that, if a person has failed to comply with a forced marriage protection order where a power of arrest is not attached, an interested party may apply for a warrant for their arrest. The section currently provides that an interested party is either the person protected by the order or a third party who applied for the order on their behalf.
Following further consideration of this section and, again, in consultation with the High Court judges who hear these cases, we have identified that an amendment is needed to extend the categories of persons who can apply for an arrest warrant. Under the current provision, if a third party had applied for the order but was not available to apply for the arrest warrant, the only person left who could apply would be the victim. If a victim did not apply for the original order, perhaps because of fear, intimidation or because they did not want to get the family into trouble, they are extremely unlikely to apply for a warrant of arrest, regardless of whether there had been a breach of the order.
The amendment provides for a further category of applicant who can make an application with the leave of the court. Requiring leave will mean that the court must be satisfied that the person applying has sufficient interest in the case for the application to proceed. This provision would also mirror the categories of person who can apply for an order in the first place.
Noble Lords will note that no equivalent amendment has been proposed in relation to Northern Ireland because the methods for dealing with a breach of order in Northern Ireland are different from those in England and Wales. It is therefore not necessary to replicate the provision for Northern Ireland.
I hope that noble Lords will agree that this change is necessary to offer the best protection to the victim. I beg to move.
Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 June 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1760-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:46:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_402664
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_402664
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_402664