MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
News Release (037/09) issued by COI News Distribution Service. 17
March 2009
Strengthened
proposals for non-jury inquests that allow for more judicial
involvement and discretion were announced today by the Government.
The Coroners and Justice Bill, currently before Parliament,
contains proposals for non-jury inquests in exceptional
circumstances where highly sensitive material which may be
relevant to a coroner's investigation cannot be made public.
Inquests are only conducted with juries in two per cent of cases
and the Government expects these new provisions to be used very
rarely, but without these plans the occasional inquest might be
stalled - as happens now.
Today, the Government revised the proposals following concerns
raised as the Bill went through Parliament. The revisions are a
considerable strengthening of the current plans as they narrow the
range of circumstances where an inquest could be certified;
increase judicial involvement and discretion, and offer more
checks and balances.
Justice Minister Bridget Prentice said:
"Inquests seek to establish the facts of a death - when the
State is implicated in the death, this can only be done when there
is access to all the relevant information in a case. Currently,
this cannot happen in all cases because it would rely on making
highly sensitive information public. With these proposals the
Government is seeking to balance the proper function of an inquest
with the need to protect sensitive information.
"The Government has listened carefully to the concerns
raised following the publication of these proposals. Today's
revisions significantly strengthen the plans by narrowing the
already limited circumstances where such an inquest could be
sought; increase judicial involvement and offer more checks and
balances on the process."
The Government's changes:
Tighten the criteria for certification so that the Secretary of
State may only certify an investigation if satisfied that it is
necessary to do so in order to protect the interests of national
security, relations with another country or preventing or
detecting crime, or to protect the safety of a witness or other
person. This raises the threshold compared with the existing
formulation - "is of the opinion that".
Remove the ability to certify an investigation on the grounds of
preventing 'real harm to the public interest'. This was
too broadly drafted.
Strengthen judicial involvement in the certified inquest by
ensuring that the High Court judge who will be appointed to hear
the inquest would have discretion to determine what measures were
needed in order to prevent the sensitive matter being made public.
This could include holding the inquest without a jury. However, it
might be that the inquest could fulfil its statutory purpose,
including meeting Article 2 obligations, without hearing evidence
about the sensitive matters.
Introduce more checks and balances because the decision by the
Secretary of State to certify an investigation would be subject to
judicial review and the decision by the judge to hold, or not to
hold, the inquest without a jury would be subject to appeal.
Strengthen the requirements to notify interested persons by
removing this from the Secretary of State and placing the
requirement on the coroner.
Notes to editors:
1. Clauses 11 to 13 of the Coroners and Justice Bill set out the
proposals for non-jury inquests.
2. Media Enquiries: Ministry of Justice Press Office on 0203 334 3536
http://www.justice.gov.uk