Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Lord Bellamy on 28 June (HL Deb, col 580), what plans the Attorney General has to meet the Chairman of the Bar Association to discuss delays in dealing with rape cases.
Answered by Lord Stewart of Dirleton - Advocate General for Scotland
A key part the Attorney General’s role as head of the profession is meeting regularly with the leaders of the Professional bodies to discuss matters of relevance within the criminal justice system including the Chair of the Bar Council, the Chair of the Criminal Bar Association, the President of the Law Society and the Bar Circuit Leaders. These valuable and productive meetings enable the Law Officers to understand the issues affecting front-line practitioners, so that they are able to articulate their concerns to ministerial colleagues to ensure that in the development of government policy, the views of the profession are reflected and understood.
Agendas for these meetings are prepared so as to allow flexibility, in order to allow for discussion of topical issues. Such issues include the views of practitioners on the Crown Court backlog, government initiatives such as the roll out of s.28 and how we are working together to improve the system performance in relation to rape cases.
The regular monthly meetings of the Bar Council are attended either by the Attorney or the Solicitor General, so as to allow the Law Officers a full understanding of the issues that are affecting front-line practitioners.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the report by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate 2019 rape inspection, published in December 2019, in how many rape cases the defence given by the defendant was that the complainant consented to sexual activity; in how many such cases the defendant was acquitted; and in how many rape cases a defendant who gave a different defence was acquitted.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of defences relied on by defendants at trial. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
Rape and serious sexual offences are horrific crimes, which can have a significant and profound impact on victims. The CPS is a partner in the ongoing cross-Government review of the criminal justice response to rape, and is committed to addressing any issues the review highlights openly and honestly. Together with the police, the CPS is already developing a joint action plan, which will address issues raised in the recently published HMCPSI Rape Inspection 2019 report and – in due course – findings of the cross-Government review.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 8 May (HL Deb, col 1220), whether the Attorney General will personally supervise the review of the digital evidence consent form; and whether the views of police and crime commissioners were taken into account in the development of that form.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The digital evidence consent forms are overseen by the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Crown Prosecution Service, and they will continue to engage with victims’ groups and the Information Commissioner’s Office to ensure that the right approach is being taken. A draft of the form was issued to a number of stakeholders during development, and this included the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners. The Attorney General will be issuing new Attorney General’s Guidelines on Disclosure in the winter. These Guidelines will assist prosecutors and investigators in ensuring that privacy and data protection considerations are properly considered in disclosure practice and procedure.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prosecution cases have collapsed because of a failure to disclose evidence in the last two years.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
Prosecutors should identify and, where appropriate, seek to rectify evidential weaknesses in a case. However, they should stop cases which do not meet the evidential stage of the Full Code Test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and which cannot be strengthened by further investigation, or where the public interest clearly does not require a prosecution. There is a continuing duty of review throughout the case.
Internal CPS case outcome recording data for 2015-17 shows that issues connected to the disclosure of unused material were recorded as the primary reason in 0.81% of all prosecutions that did not result in a conviction.
Other reasons prosecutions may be stopped include that new material reviewed during the case reveals evidence which undermines the prosecution case, key witnesses do not attend, key evidence is ruled inadmissible, or other circumstances change to the extent that a charge no longer meets the evidential stage of the Full Code Test.
The most frequent reason that a prosecution did not result in a conviction was that the defendant was acquitted after trial. This was the reason in 25% of such cases.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government when the Attorney General received a letter from the Chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission on the issue of disclosure of evidence; and whether that correspondence can, and will, be published.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Attorney General’s Office received a letter regarding disclosure in criminal proceedings from the Chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission on 7 July 2016. The text of the letter is published on their website ccrc.gov.uk. It highlighted that particular attention would be drawn to the issue in their annual report published later that month.
In April 2016 the Attorney General wrote to the Criminal Justice Joint Inspectorates supporting a proposal for a joint thematic inspection of disclosure as one of the most important issues in the trial process and a vital component of a fair trial.
The CCRC letter was drawn to the attention of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of the Crown Prosecution Service to assist preparation for the joint inspection of disclosure which was carried out between January and July 2017.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Attorney General's review of disclosure procedures included a review of prosecutions in magistrates' courts; and if so, when they were included.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Attorney General’s review of disclosure is a review of the efficiency and effectiveness of disclosure in the criminal justice system, including specifically how processes and policies are implemented by prosecution and defence practitioners, police officers and investigators.
The review will consider evidence under the following cross-cutting themes:
a) Processes within ‘volume’ cases (within the Crown Courts and Magistrates’ Courts) and ‘complex cases’ including economic crime;
b) Guidance, including any Codes of Practices, Protocols or Guidelines and legislation;
c) Case management, including initiatives such as ‘Transforming Summary Justice’, ‘Better Case Management’ and ‘Digital Casework’; and
d) Capabilities across criminal justice system including staffing, training, existing tools and digital technology.
The scope of the review is wide and has always included disclosure in magistrates’ courts. The Terms of Reference will be published on the Attorney General’s Office website.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, for the last available year, how many cases were not proceeded with in magistrates' courts on the date fixed for trial because of a failure by the prosecution to disclose evidence.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
CPS data for 2016-17 records that there were prosecutions of 499,816 defendants completed in the magistrates’ court, resulting in the conviction of 423,715 defendants, a conviction rate of 84.8%.
There are a number of reasons why a case may not be proceeded with after charge. Review of cases is a continuing process and prosecutors must take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, particularly as details of the defence case become known.
Internal CPS case outcome recording data does not record cases by reference to the date on which the decision not to proceed was made. It is therefore not possible to provide data for cases that were not proceeded with on the date fixed for trial. Issues relating to the failure to disclosure unused material accounted for 1% of the cases that did not result in a conviction in the magistrates’ court in that year.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they received the Joint Inspectorate report into disclosure of evidence; and when the Attorney General launched his review of the rules and guidance relating to the disclosure of evidence.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Attorney General’s Office received a copy of the Report of the Joint Inspection of the Disclosure of Unused Material in Volume Crown Court Cases from HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate on 4th July 2017.
The findings, and updates on progress against the report’s recommendations, were discussed at regular superintendence meetings with the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The Attorney General’s review was scoped and planned over subsequent months and the review team commenced work on the review itself on 4th December 2017.
On 11th December 2017 in a written ministerial statement on economic crime and anti-corruption [HLWS325], the Home Secretary formally announced that there would be a review of disclosure procedures led by the Attorney General.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Keen of Elie on 8 January (HL4364), whether there have been instances where the advice of the law officers has been shared with Parliament in the last 30 years.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
There have been rare instances in the past where a Minister has shared legal advice with Parliament. However, the policy of successive Governments (in line with Constitutional convention) remains that we do not comment on advice that may or may not have been given by the Law Officers, other than in exceptional circumstances and with the Law Officers’ consent.
Asked by: Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions the Attorney General has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions regarding trials where the prosecution has ceased to prosecute rape cases in recent months; and how many rape cases have been discontinued in court due to a failure to disclose evidence in the last three months.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Attorney General has frequent discussions with the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) on a range of issues relating to the prosecution of rape and sexual offending.
This month the DPP is bringing together partners from across the criminal justice system to discuss the challenges of satisfying the statutory disclosure test in the digital age.
More broadly, the Attorney General has also announced that he is undertaking a review of disclosure in the criminal justice system to ensure it is fit for purpose.
There are a number of reasons why a rape prosecution may not be continued with. Internal CPS case outcome recording data for 2016-17 shows that issues connected to the disclosure of unused material were recorded as the primary reason for 2% of the rape prosecutions that were subsequently not proceeded with after charge. More recent data are not currently available.