Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much her Department spent on the (a) Calvert-Smith review and (b) Altman review of the Serious Fraud Office.
Answered by Michael Ellis
The costs of Sir David Calvert-Smith’s independent review into the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) handling of the Unaoil case (R. v Akle & Anor), which was commissioned by the Attorney General, are still being finalised. The costs to date to the Attorney General’s Office are £84,571.90. There are some costs outstanding, but it is anticipated these will not increase the overall cost of the review significantly. The total costs will be recovered from the SFO.
The cost of Brian Altman QC’s independent review of the collapse of R v. Woods & Marshall, which was commissioned by the Director of the SFO, was £359,442.37. This was paid for by the SFO.
Both reviews presented valuable recommendations and the implementation of these remain a priority for the Law Officers and the Director of the SFO.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) spent on the (a) prosecution trials brought against ENRC and (b) SFO defence against ENRC counter claims lawsuit.
Answered by Michael Ellis
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has an ongoing investigation into ENRC. There are no prosecutions, and therefore no associated costs, at this stage. The ENRC have brought two civil actions for alleged misfeasance against the SFO. This matter remains ongoing and as such the final costs are not yet determined. |
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much the Serious Fraud Office spent on the (a) Employment Tribunal and (b) subsequent appeal brought by a former ENRC case-controller who was dismissed.
Answered by Michael Ellis
An Employment Tribunal has not been brought by a former ENRC case-controller against the Serious Fraud Office. |
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many applications have been submitted to the Advisory Committee on Public Appointments by civil servants regarding the business roles they intend to take up after leaving their positions with the Serious Fraud Office in the period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2022.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
During this period, one application was made to the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) by a former Civil Servant following employment at the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). This application was made by former SFO Director Sir David Green.
The details of Sir David’s application are available here.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, whether she plans to implement the recommendations from the Criminal Justice Joint Inspection into the police and CPS's response to rape post-charge in full; what her timetable is for implementing those recommendations; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
The CPS has welcomed the recent Criminal Justice Joint Inspection (CJJI) report on how well the criminal justice system serves survivors of rape and has largely accepted all the recommendations within it that relate directly to their work. They will use the report’s findings and recommendations to further inform their response to rape prosecutions and to build on the significant work undertaken so far, which has focussed on the following three main areas of work:Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the oral Answer of 6 January 2022, Official Report, column 146, on the Criminal Justice System: Disclosure between Parties, when the independent review on the disclosure failings at the Serious Fraud Office will commence; who will be conducting that review; and what the (a) timescale and (b) terms of reference for that review are.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
The details of the review, including the intended timescales and the terms of reference, will be published once they have been agreed. I am committed to ensuring that this review is conducted as quickly as possible.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many of the 167 cases referred to the Crown Prosecution Service by police under sections (a) 2(1) and (b) 2(A) of the Suicide Act 1961 between 1 April 2009 and 31 July 2020 related to a person with a terminal illness.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
CPS Policy on assisted suicide provides guidance to prosecutors on assessing the evidential and public interest stages in the Code for Crown Prosecutors when reaching decisions in cases of encouraging or assisting suicide.
The Policy promotes consistency of decision making and is very clear about the factors which are to be considered both for and against prosecution. It sets out clear guidance about the importance of establishing whether the decision of the person who wants to commit suicide is voluntary, clear, settled, and informed, and whether the decision has been made without any pressure from the suspect.
The CPS publishes information collated from manual records on cases relating to Assisted Suicide. From 1 April 2009 up to 31 January 2021, there have been 167 cases referred to the CPS by the police that have been recorded as assisted suicide. Of these 167 cases:
eight cases were referred onwards for prosecution for homicide or other serious crime.
Of the 110 cases not proceeded with by the CPS, manual records indicate:
A further six cases are recorded with more than one suspect in the same case; these resulted in a mixed outcome where the evidential stage was not met for some suspects and the public interest test was not met for the others.
CPS manual records do not capture specific case circumstances, including those relating to persons with a terminal illness.
The CPS collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. The CPS does not collect data that constitutes official statistics as defined in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many of the 167 cases referred to the CPS by police under the Suicide Act 1961, Sections 2(1) and 2(A), between 1 April 2009 and 31 July 2020 did not result in a charge; and how many of those cases failed to pass the (a) evidential and (b) public interest stage.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
CPS Policy on assisted suicide provides guidance to prosecutors on assessing the evidential and public interest stages in the Code for Crown Prosecutors when reaching decisions in cases of encouraging or assisting suicide.
The Policy promotes consistency of decision making and is very clear about the factors which are to be considered both for and against prosecution. It sets out clear guidance about the importance of establishing whether the decision of the person who wants to commit suicide is voluntary, clear, settled, and informed, and whether the decision has been made without any pressure from the suspect.
The CPS publishes information collated from manual records on cases relating to Assisted Suicide. From 1 April 2009 up to 31 January 2021, there have been 167 cases referred to the CPS by the police that have been recorded as assisted suicide. Of these 167 cases:
eight cases were referred onwards for prosecution for homicide or other serious crime.
Of the 110 cases not proceeded with by the CPS, manual records indicate:
A further six cases are recorded with more than one suspect in the same case; these resulted in a mixed outcome where the evidential stage was not met for some suspects and the public interest test was not met for the others.
CPS manual records do not capture specific case circumstances, including those relating to persons with a terminal illness.
The CPS collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. The CPS does not collect data that constitutes official statistics as defined in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Policy for Prosecutors in Respect of Cases of Encouraging and Assisting Suicide between 1 April 2009 and 1 April 2021.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
CPS Policy on assisted suicide provides guidance to prosecutors on assessing the evidential and public interest stages in the Code for Crown Prosecutors when reaching decisions in cases of encouraging or assisting suicide.
The Policy promotes consistency of decision making and is very clear about the factors which are to be considered both for and against prosecution. It sets out clear guidance about the importance of establishing whether the decision of the person who wants to commit suicide is voluntary, clear, settled, and informed, and whether the decision has been made without any pressure from the suspect.
The CPS publishes information collated from manual records on cases relating to Assisted Suicide. From 1 April 2009 up to 31 January 2021, there have been 167 cases referred to the CPS by the police that have been recorded as assisted suicide. Of these 167 cases:
eight cases were referred onwards for prosecution for homicide or other serious crime.
Of the 110 cases not proceeded with by the CPS, manual records indicate:
A further six cases are recorded with more than one suspect in the same case; these resulted in a mixed outcome where the evidential stage was not met for some suspects and the public interest test was not met for the others.
CPS manual records do not capture specific case circumstances, including those relating to persons with a terminal illness.
The CPS collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. The CPS does not collect data that constitutes official statistics as defined in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 5 January 2016 to Question 20564, how many people were charged with jury (a) intimidation and (b) tampering in each of the last five years.
Answered by Robert Buckland
Section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 creates two offences:
S.51(1) creates an offence directed at acts against a person who assists in an investigation of an offence or who is a witness or potential witness or juror or potential juror whilst an investigation or trial is in progress
S.51(2) creates an offence directed at acts against a person who assisted in an investigation of an offence or who was a witness or juror after an investigation or trial has been concluded.
The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) identify the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts, rather than the number of defendants prosecuted. A single defendant may be prosecuted for multiple offences.
The number of offences charged under s.51(1) and s.51(2) are as follows:
2010-2011 | 2011-2012 | 2012-2013 | 2013-2014 | 2014-2015 | ||
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(1) | Intimidate a witness / juror | 3,275 | 2,630 | 2,148 | 2,066 | 2,202 |
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(2) | Do an act which harmed a witness / juror | 102 | 166 | 99 | 72 | 109 |
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(2) | Threaten a witness / juror | 240 | 172 | 118 | 122 | 129 |
The proportion of CPS cases that result in a guilty plea has increased from 67.2% in 10/11 to 74.5% in 14/15 which means that there are fewer cases that are likely to be subject to the sorts of acts covered by s.51(1) during the course of the prosecution.
Also, s.51(1) covers intimidation of juror or potential jurors. The number of crown court trials have also been reducing over the period in question by 9.5%, again resulting in fewer cases where S.51(1) offences are likely to apply.