Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Attorney General will review the sentence of three years for manslaughter given to a pedestrian who remonstrated with a cyclist riding on the pavement on the basis that it is unduly harsh.
Answered by Lord Stewart of Dirleton - Advocate General for Scotland
It is believed this is a reference to the case of Auriol Grey who was sentenced at Peterborough Crown Court on 2 March 2023 to 3 years’ imprisonment for manslaughter. The Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme works only to increase sentences that are too low so that they appear unduly lenient. The Law Officers cannot consider whether a sentence is unduly harsh or take any action if it appears to be so. An offender may appeal against their sentence if they consider it to be manifestly excessive. |
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Government Legal Department, in any of its official (1) paperwork, (2) guidance, (3) instructions, (4) manuals, or (5) other documents, (a) has replaced, or (b) intends to replace, the word “mother” with the phrase “parent who has given birth”.
Answered by Lord Stewart of Dirleton - Advocate General for Scotland
GLD has not replaced, nor does it intend to replace, the word “mother” with the phrase “parent who has given birth” in any of its official (1) paperwork, (2) guidance, (3) instructions, (4) manuals, or (5) other documents.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many compensation claims have been brought against Government departments, except the Department of Health and Social Care, since 28 February; how many claimants there are; and what was the amount of damages sought in each case.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
Since 28 February 2020, 601 claims for damages have been brought against government departments, excluding the Department for Health and Social Care, in litigation conducted by the Government Legal Department (GLD).
GLD conducts most, but not all, litigation on behalf of government departments. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation.
GLD is unable to give the amount of damages sought in each case because that information is not always available at the early stage of the case and whether such information is available could not be ascertained without examining every case file and thus incurring disproportionate costs.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Keen of Elie on 7 March (HL5766), whether they will set out what they regard as the public interest in prosecuting UK citizens who fought against ISIL forces in Syria, and not prosecuting those who fought against UK-backed forces in Syria.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The decision to prosecute UK citizens who fought in Syria is taken independently of Government by the CPS with the permission of the Attorney General as the guardian of the public interest where required by statute. The public interest in prosecuting these cases is considered on a case by case basis taking account of the factors set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and the surrounding circumstances. There is no policy of prosecuting those who fought against ISIL forces and not prosecuting those who fought against UK-backed forces.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions have taken place between the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General regarding the potential prosecution of UK citizens who fought against (1) UK backed forces in Syria, and (2) ISIL forces in Syria.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The DPP has regular meetings with the Attorney General about the work of the Crown Prosecution Service. The CPS makes its prosecution decisions independently. The DPP is required to seek the AG’s permission before she gives her consent to the prosecution of certain offences under terrorism legislation. The AG makes those decision in line with the Protocol between the Attorney General and the Prosecuting Departments, that is ‘independently of government, applying well established prosecution principles of evidential sufficiency and public interest.’
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have any plans to review the performance of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The performance of the DPP is reviewed on a regular basis and the Attorney General has regular meetings with the DPP about the work of the Crown Prosecution Service. The Crown Prosecution Service is also regularly inspected by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate which includes looking at performance within each area and on a national level for thematic reports.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Keen of Elie on 16 January (HL4533), in cases where there is no evidence at all against an accused, whether the CPS intends to drop the wording recommended by Sir Richard Henriques that "the case failed to meet the evidential test", and to change the Code accordingly.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Crown Prosecution Service does not currently intend to change the wording recommended by Sir Richard Henriques for public announcements of decisions not to charge an individual, namely that “the case failed to meet the evidential test”.
The Crown Prosecution Service has no immediate plans to change the wording of the evidential stage of the full Code test.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the use by the CPS of the phrase “insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction” in cases where there is no evidence at all against the accused; and what guidance they have given, or intend to give, to the CPS in respect of such use.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code) sets out the general principles Crown prosecutors must follow when they make decisions on cases.
The full Code test has two stages. Crown prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect or defendant on each charge. If the case does pass the evidential stage, Crown prosecutors must proceed to the second stage and decide if a prosecution is needed in the public interest.
The Crown Prosecution Service has adopted the wording recommended in the 2016 report of Sir Richard Henriques for public announcements of decisions not to charge an individual, namely that “the case failed to meet the evidential test”. That terminology is not a comment on the strength or weakness of the evidence in any particular case.
The test applied by prosecutors continues to be that set out in the Code.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have not prosecuted the reported 350 Jihadis who have returned to the UK and are suspected of having fought in Syria or Iraq.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has successfully prosecuted 35 cases involving 54 defendants who have returned to the UK and are suspected of having fought in Syria and / or Iraq. It currently has 13 such ongoing prosecutions involving 30 defendants. The Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland (PPSNI) is also dealing with one ongoing Syria-related prosecution. If there is evidence that people are going abroad to engage in terrorist activity, they can be arrested and prosecuted. They can also be arrested and prosecuted if they return to the UK. There are a wide range of offences that can be used to prosecute such individuals but each case has to be considered individually on its merits and whether an arrest or prosecution can take place will depend on the evidence available. If the police refer a case to the CPS, they consider whether the test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors is met. That is, whether there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction for any offence and, if so, whether it is in the public interest to prosecute.Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Keen of Elie on 19 February (HL5998) regarding the case of Mark Pearson, who in the Crown Prosecution Service made the decision to present to the court a video that was run at half the normal speed.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
In the case concerned there was no video evidence. The police created a disc containing a series of still images with gaps of around a second in time. The timing of each image was clearly shown. The disc was served on the defence but was not played in court by the prosecution. The defence adduced their own disc as part of their case. The prosecution did not rely on the still images because at the trial the identification of the defendant was not in issue.