Alleged Spying Case: Role of Attorney General’s Office
Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Solicitor General
This case was prosecuted under legislation that was in force when the alleged offences were committed in 2021 to 2023. The law has now changed—it took the Conservative party many years to tighten up national security legislation; it passed with support from Labour Members—and under the legislation as it stands now, it is easier to bring prosecutions of this nature because the enemy test no longer has to be satisfied.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
The Attorney General has a duty to superintend prosecution agencies. The Government have previously defined superintendence as, inter alia,
“a right for the Attorney General to be consulted and informed about difficult, sensitive and high-profile cases”,
of which this is clearly one. Given that the Attorney General is responsible by statute for the superintendence of the Crown Prosecution Service and overall super- intendency of the DPP, and additionally has the requirement for consent to prosecute certain categories of criminal offences such as those relating to official secrets, what action did the Attorney General take once he had been informed of the potential collapse of the China spying trial?
The Solicitor General
As I have set out, consent to prosecute in this case had to be granted by Law Officers, and that was done under the previous Government. Once consent is granted, it is for the CPS to prosecute a case, rightly without political interference. This case was discontinued by the CPS on evidential grounds, as opposed to public interest grounds. I am sure that the hon. Member is aware of the two-part test for prosecutors. When a case is discontinued on evidential grounds, it is not for the CPS to consult with Law Officers in advance of that. I say again that the Attorney General will first give written evidence this week and then oral evidence on Tuesday.
Attorney General’s Office: Conflicts of Interest
Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Solicitor General
I agree with my hon. Friend, and I am grateful to him for making that point. As I said earlier, barristers are quite simply not their clients, and I have quoted the words of the current Conservative shadow Attorney General.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
The current Attorney General has a track record of taking up multiple cases against the British Government. Given his previous work with regards to both Gerry Adams and the families of those making claims against UK special forces, on which matters will the Attorney General recuse himself from advising Ministers owing to clear conflicts of interest? If he is not able to fulfil the full scope of his role owing to his prior career, is his position even tenable?
The Solicitor General
I am afraid I could not be more clear: I have already said that where the Attorney General has conflicts, he will recuse himself.