My Lords, I intervened earlier on Amendment 286 because of my concern about an absolute rule in this area. My concern is increased by the practical experience of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, in this matter. I am also concerned about Amendment 289 regarding the complainant’s right of representation in relation to an application and whether there should be evidence concerning sexual conduct, not merely for the reason the noble and learned Lord gave, with which I agree: that the prosecution are ministers of justice and are there to deal with such matters. I am also concerned that this is a recipe for delay. If it is really to be said that the victim is to be separately represented and able to make an application, presumably after notice has been given, and there is to be a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal, that is inevitably going to delay further trials that are already far too long delayed.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Pannick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 November 2021.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
816 c600 Session
2021-22Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-12-08 15:16:10 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-11-22/21112233000126
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-11-22/21112233000126
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-11-22/21112233000126