Criminal Law Legislation Update
| Published date | 01 December 2003 |
| Date | 01 December 2003 |
| Author | Sally Louise Ireland |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.67.6.486.19440 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Criminal Law Legislation
Update*
Sally Louise Ireland†
Criminal Justice Bill
This update will deal with the Pts 8–11 of the Criminal Justice Bill,
which is currently at Committee stage in the House of Lords, and
therefore is subject to amendment.
Part 8
Part 8 of the Bill deals with the use of live links in criminal proceedings.
Live links are of course already in use for witnesses in certain serious
cases who are unavailable to attend court, and for witnesses in need of
protection under the ‘special measures’ provisions of the Youth Justice
and Criminal Evidence Act 1999. However, cl. 50 of the Bill proposes to
give the criminal courts a general discretion to direct that a witness other
than the defendant may give his evidence through a live link. This may
take place on the application of either party or by the court’s own
motion. The court’s discretion is limited by the local availability of
suitable facilities, and by the need for this method of giving evidence to
be in the efficient or effective administration of justice. The court must
have regard to all the circumstances of the case, including whether a
direction might tend to inhibit any party from effectively testing the
witness’s evidence.
This provision removes the rather artificial distinction in s. 32 of the
Criminal Justice Act 1988 between different types of offences when
determining whether a live link may be used where a witness is outside
the UK. It is of course highly desirable that justice should not be impeded
by practical factors such as the inability of a witness to travel. This
provision may also decrease the amount of hearsay evidence before the
courts, which is another welcome development. However, it is to be
hoped that the courts will require that the witness either is not available
to give evidence in person or that the quality of the evidence would be
substantially impaired by his so doing. The judge may give the jury a
direction to ensure that they give the same weight to the evidence as if
it had been given in person (cl. 53).
Part 9
Part 9 of the Bill contains more controversial provisions, as it proposes to
give prosecuting authorities a right of appeal against rulings, including
*As at September 2003.
† Pupil, 18 Red Lion Court.
486
To continue reading
Request your trial