Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many criminal prosecutions related to abortion have been brought in each of the last five years, and what assessment they have made of connection between the number of such prosecutions and the availability of telemedicine for early medical abortion.
Answered by Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
The Ministry of Justice publishes data on the number of prosecutions across England and Wales in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.
The offences that constitute unlawful abortion include procuring an illegal abortion under sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, as well as child destruction under section 1 of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929. This data is held on a principal-offence basis and therefore reports information relating to the most serious offence that a defendant was dealt for. The Department of Health and Social Care is responsible for the policy relating to telemedicine for early medical abortion. The available data does not specify how many of these prosecutions are linked to the use of telemedicine for early medical abortion. The Government has not made an assessment on the connection between the number of such prosecutions and the availability of telemedicine for early medical abortion.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether an impact assessment was carried out in respect of the removal of the preliminary inquiry stage of court proceedings in serious crime cases in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
Section 6(1) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 originally contained provisions which obliged a magistrates’ court inquiring into an offence as examining justices to commit a defendant charged with an indictable offence to the Crown Court for trial, if, after consideration of the evidence (including oral evidence), it was of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence to put the defendant on trial by jury. If the court was not of that opinion (and the defendant was in custody for no other reason than that offence), it was obliged to discharge the defendant. Pursuant to a recommendation from the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice in 1993, the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 amended the committal provisions (with effect from March 1997) to exclude the possibility of oral evidence. The effect was therefore that magistrates' courts could consider only documentary evidence tendered by the prosecution when determining whether there the defendant should be committed for trial. The resulting paper-based committal proceedings were subsequently replaced by the present procedure in May 2013 when section 6 was repealed, with the result that there is no preliminary examination of the evidence in the magistrates’ court and cases are sent to the Crown Court when it appears to the magistrates’ court that the case is more suitable to be tried there. There was no impact assessment.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he will take to uphold rights currently afforded to victims in the UK under the EU Victims Rights Directive after the UK leaves the EU.
Answered by Edward Argar
In England and Wales, transposition of the EU Victims’ Directive was evidenced through pre-existing legislation and through the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (the Victims’ Code), which is issued by the Secretary of State for Justice under section 32 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. The legislation and Victims’ Code exist independently of EU law and as such leaving the EU will not affect the services provided to victims.
We committed in the Victims Strategy, published in September 2018, to amend the Victims’ Code to address its complexity, accessibility and update the entitlements so that they are more reflective of victims’ needs. We intend to consult on these changes shortly.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure the maintenance of mutual recognition of judgements in the area of family law after the UK leaves the EU.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The Political Declaration makes clear that the UK and EU have agreed to explore options for judicial cooperation in matrimonial, parental responsibility and other related matters. This goes further than the arrangements that the EU currently has with any other third country to date in relation to family justice. The precise detail of the agreement will be subject to further negotiation during the implementation period.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect on the UK's participation in the (a) Brussels and (b) Lugano Conventions on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters of the UK leaving the EU.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The UK and EU negotiation teams have agreed the terms of an implementation period running from 29 March 2019 until 31 December 2020, which will mean that the UK will continue to participate in the Brussels Ia Regulation and the 2007 Lugano Convention until the end of the period. The UK also remains committed to future civil judicial cooperation with the EU, recognising that it is in both our interests, as well as continued cooperation with our international partners.
Of course, it is only right for a responsible government to prepare for a ‘no deal’ scenario. and in September of this year we published a Technical Notice dedicated to civil judicial cooperation, detailing how the existing rules will change in a ‘no deal’ scenario.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what representations he has received from legal representatives of UK citizens on fair and equitable justice for UK victims of terrorists attacks by ETA.
Answered by Phillip Lee
I am not aware of any such representations. I would be happy to consider any specific issues or concerns which the Honourable Member wishes to raise.
Asked by: Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has received representations on the level of availability of interpreters willing to travel for judicial proceedings in Northern Ireland; and if he will take steps to ensure the provision of interpreters from England and Wales for such proceedings in Northern Ireland.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The provision of services required to support the administration of justice to the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NICTS), is a matter for the Northern Ireland Department of Justice. The Ministry of Justice has robust language service arrangements in place to support Northern Ireland sittings of the First Tier Tribunal (Immigration & Asylum Chamber) and the Upper Tribunal tribunals, which covers the whole of the United Kingdom.
Where requested to do so, my officials will share the Ministry of Justice register of available interpreters with their NICTS counterparts, to support the wider administration of the Northern Ireland justice system.