Can the Minister explain one difference between the situation that has applied in the past and the situation that will apply in the future if the Bill goes through as it is? We are now legislating to make properly authorised criminal conduct lawful, rather than continuing with the current position whereby MI5 or another authorising authority is able to argue that it would not be in the public interest for prosecuting authorities to prosecute properly authorised criminal conduct, but there is no guarantee of immunity. What we are now saying is that they are not breaking the law, rather than, as in the past, that they were breaking the law, but that it was against the public interest to prosecute. Why the reason for that change?
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Julian Lewis
(Independent (affiliation))
in the House of Commons on Monday, 5 October 2020.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c655 Session
2019-21Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-28 15:55:23 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100532000002
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100532000002
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100532000002