SESSION 2001/02 | SECOND REPORT |
Report on AD HOC COMMITTEE
REPORT ON THE DRAFT JUSTICE (NI) BILL
AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REVIEW - IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
REPORT AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
The Committee was established, in accordance with Assembly Standing
Order 49, by resolution of the Assembly on 19 November 2001 and amended on 3
December 2001. The function of the Committee was to consider the draft Justice
(NI) Bill and the Criminal Justice Review Implementation Plan and to report
thereon to the Assembly by 14 January 2002.
The Committee had ten members, including a Chairperson and Deputy
Chairperson; its quorum was five. The membership of the Committee was as follows-
Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton, Chairperson;
Mrs Eileen Bell, Deputy Chairperson;
Mr Alex Attwood;
Mr Gregory Campbell;
Mr David Ervine;
Sir John Gorman;
Mr Alban Maginness;
Mr Mitchel McLaughlin;
Mrs Mary Nelis; and
Mr Ian Paisley Jnr.
As was agreed by the Committee, other members of the Assembly
could act as deputies for those members of the Committee who were unable to
attend proceedings of the Committee. The following is a list of members who
participated on the Committee on that basis-
Dr Esmond Birnie;
Mr John Kelly;
Mr Mick Murphy;
Mrs Patricia Lewsley;
Mr Pat McNamee; and
Mr Mark Robinson.
The report and proceedings of the Committee have been published
by the Stationery Office by order of the Committee. All publications of the
Committee have been posted at http://www.ni-assembly.gov.uk/ the website of
the Northern Ireland Assembly.
All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of Ad
hoc Committees at Room 371 Parliament Buildings, Stormont, Belfast BT4 3XX.
Table of contents
Background to the Report
Introduction
Remit of the Committee
Proceedings of the Committee
Acknowledgements
Report of the Criminal Justice Review Group and the draft Justice (NI) Bill
Report of the Criminal Justice Review Group
Draft Justice (Northern Ireland) Bill
Committee's consideration of the proposed legislation and implementation plan
General Comments
Structural Reform
Openness and Transparency
New Approaches
Conclusions
Appendices
Appendix 1 - Minutes of Proceedings
Appendix 2 - List of Witnesses
Appendix 3 - Minutes of Evidence
Appendix 4 - Written submissions from the Parties
Appendix 5 - Written Submissions
BACKGROUND TO THE REPORT
INTRODUCTION
- This is a Report made by the Ad hoc Committee to the
Assembly, pursuant to the resolutions of the Assembly on Monday 19 November
and 3 December 2001. The Report describes the work of the Committee over the
period 26 November 2001 to 8 January 2002.
top
REMIT OF THE COMMITTEE
- As agreed by the Assembly, the Committee was established to consider: -
- the draft Justice (Northern Ireland) Bill; and
- the Criminal Justice Review Implementation Plan,
and to report thereon to the Assembly.
- Copies of the relevant papers are available from NIO online (http://www.nio.gov.uk/),
the website of the Northern Ireland Office.
top
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
- During the period covered by this Report, the Committee held 7 meetings:
26, 27 and 29 November; 4, 11 and 13 December 2001; and 8 January 2002. The
Minutes of Proceedings for these meetings are included at Appendix 1.
- In the course of its proceedings, the Committee heard evidence from the
following bodies: -
- The Committee on the Administration of Justice;
- The Criminal Bar Association;
- The Law Society of Northern Ireland;
- The Northern Ireland Court Service;
- The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission;
- The Northern Ireland Office; and
- The Probation Board for Northern Ireland.
A complete list of those who gave evidence to the Committee
is included at Appendix 2.
- At the Committee's first meeting on 26 November 2001, the Committee elected
Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton, Chairperson and Mrs Eileen Bell, Deputy Chairperson.
The Committee also considered its options for its consideration of the draft
Justice (NI) Bill and the Criminal Justice Review Implementation Plan. The
Committee unanimously agreed that the deadline, by which the Committee was
to report to the Assembly, was unworkable. It was agreed that the Chairperson
should table a motion in the Assembly to extend that period. The meeting was
held in private session.
- On 27 November 2001, a researcher from the Assembly's Research and Library
Services gave the Committee a presentation on the background to the Government's
proposals, detailing the history of the reform from the Belfast Agreement through
to the Report of the Criminal Justice Review Group. The researcher also provided
a focused examination of a number of themes in the Implementation Plan. The
Committee also conducted its first reading of the draft legislation; the Assembly's
legal advisor provided assistance. The meeting was held in private session.
- At its meeting on 29 November 2001 the Committee held the first of its three
evidence sessions (The Minutes of Evidence for the Committee's evidence sessions
are included at Appendix 3). During this session the Committee
heard evidence from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) and
the Law Society of Northern Ireland (LSNI). The NIHRC gave evidence on the
human rights aspects of the proposals and LSNI provided evidence on the impact
of the proposals on the legal profession. The meeting was held in public session.
- On 3 December 2001, pursuant to a resolution of the Committee, the Chairperson
moved a motion in the Assembly to extend the period by which the Committee
must submit its report to the Assembly from 11 December 2001 to 14 January
2002. This motion was agreed.
- At its meeting on 4 December 2001, the Committee held the second of its
three evidence sessions. During this session the Committee heard evidence from
the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) and the Northern Ireland Court Service; and
the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ). The meeting was held
in public session.
- At the Committee's meeting on 11 December 2001, the Committee held its final
evidence session. During this session the Committee heard evidence from the
Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI) and the Criminal Bar Association.
The meeting was held in public session.
- The Committee also received written submissions from those political parties
of the Assembly, represented on the Committee, setting out their respective
positions in relation to the proposals. The texts of these are reproduced at
Appendix 4. In addition, the Committee also received a number of
submissions from witnesses and other interested bodies. These texts are reproduced
at Appendix 5.
top
Acknowledgements
- The Committee would like to express its thanks to all the organisations
which provided evidence; without the benefit of that evidence this report could
not have been compiled. The Committee would also like to record its appreciation
to Mr Percy Johnston, Legal Advisor to the Assembly, who provided the members
of the Committee with a overview of the draft legislation. The Committee would
also like to express special thanks to Mr Hugh Widdis, Assembly Research &
Library Services, for his service to the Committee and his contribution to
the proceedings.
top
REPORT OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REVIEW GROUP AND
THE DRAFT JUSTICE (NI) BILL
REPORT OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REVIEW GROUP
- The terms of reference for the Review of the Criminal Justice System (hereinafter
referred to as the Review) were set out in the Belfast Agreement. The Agreement
envisaged a wide-ranging review of criminal justice (other than policing and
those elements of the system relating to the emergency legislation) with the
aim of ensuring a system of criminal justice for Northern Ireland that: -
- delivers a fair and impartial system of justice to the community;
- is responsive to the community's concerns, and encourages community involvement
where appropriate;
- has the confidence of all parts of the community; and
- delivers justice efficiently and effectively.
- The Review took the form of a fundamental examination of the justice system
in Northern Ireland. Its terms of reference were: -
Taking account of the aims of the criminal justice system as
set out in the Agreement, the review will address the structure, management
and resourcing of publicly funded elements of the criminal justice system and
will bring forward proposals for future criminal justice arrangements (other
than policing and those aspects of the system relating to emergency legislation,
which the Government is considering separately) covering such issues as: -
- the arrangements for making appointments to the judiciary and magistracy,
and safeguards for protecting their independence;
- the arrangements for the organisation and supervision of the prosecution
process, and for safeguarding its independence;
- measures to improve the responsiveness and accountability of, and any lay
participation in the criminal justice system;
- mechanisms for addressing law reform;
- the scope for structured co-operation between the criminal justice agencies
on both parts of the island; and
- the structure and organisation of criminal justice functions that might
be devolved to an Assembly, including the possibility of establishing a Department
of Justice, while safeguarding the essential independence of many of the key
functions in this area.
- It studied the principles and values that should underpin the criminal justice
system and offered new approaches to delivering services, for example in the
areas of restorative justice and community safety. The Review Group undertook
extensive research and brought together examples of international best practice
and also made a number of suggestions for improving the quality of services
provided to victims by both statutory and voluntary agencies.
- The Review was published in March 2000, and was then subject to extensive
consultation. Responses to the consultation were received from a wide range
of groups and individuals, including the political parties, the criminal justice
agencies, other organisations in the statutory, voluntary and community sectors,
and the public.
top
DRAFT JUSTICE (NORTHERN IRELAND) BILL
- During its proceedings, the Committee had before it a copy of the draft
Justice (NI) Bill and the accompanying explanatory notes. To inform debate,
both within the Assembly and further afield, the Committee agreed that its
report should detail the provisions of the draft Bill.
- As set out in the draft Bill, its purpose is to: -
Amend the law of Northern Ireland relating to the judiciary, law officers
and courts; to establish a Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland,
a Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland and a Northern Ireland
Law Commission; to amend the law of youth justice in Northern Ireland; to
make provision for making available to victims of crime information about
the release of offenders in Northern Ireland; to make provision about community
safety in Northern Ireland; to amend the law of legal aid in Northern Ireland;
and for connected purposes.
- The draft Bill is in six parts: The Judiciary; Law Officers and Public Prosecution
Service; Other New Institutions; Youth Justice; Miscellaneous; and Supplementary.
Each of these parts is explored in more detail below.
Part 1 - The Judiciary
- Clause 1 sets out a guarantee of continued judicial independence, which
states that, "Those with responsibility for the administration of justice must
uphold the continued independence of the judiciary".
- Clauses 2 - 9 set out the procedures for the appointment, removal and complaints
for judicial offices. Provision is made for a Judicial Appointments Commission
(JAC) to select people to be appointed, or recommend for appointment to specific
judicial offices that are listed at schedule 1 of the draft Bill. This list
of offices may be amended by order of the First Minister and deputy First Minister,
acting jointly and with the agreement of the Lord Chief Justice.
- The JAC is to consist of a Chairman, who shall be the Lord Chief Justice,
and twelve other members appointed by the First Minister and deputy First Minister.
Of those twelve members,
- five are to be nominated by the Lord Chief Justice,
- one is to be a barrister nominated by the General Council of the Bar of
Northern Ireland;
- one is to be a solicitor nominated by the Law Society of Northern Ireland;
and
- the remaining five are to be lay members.
In appointing persons to be lay members, the First Minister
and deputy First Minister must, so far as possible, ensure that, taken together,
they are representative of the community in Northern Ireland. Schedule 2 to
the draft Bill makes further provisions in relation to members' tenure, members'
salaries, staffing, financial provisions and the operation and procedures of
the JAC.
- In relation to the most senior judicial offices, that of the Lord Chief
Justice and Lords Justices of Appeal, appointments are to be made by Her Majesty,
on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, by letters patent under the Great
Seal of Northern Ireland. Before making such a recommendation, the Prime Minister
must consult with the First Minister and deputy First Minister and the Lord
Chief Justice. The JAC shall advise the First Minister and deputy First Minister
as to the procedure they should adopt for formulating their response to the
Prime Minister; that procedure shall be subject to the approval of the Prime
Minister. Provision has also been made for Her Majesty to make appointments
of judges to the High Court; such appointments may be made on recommendation
of the First Minister and deputy First Minister.
- The power to remove a person from the most senior judicial offices, on the
grounds of misbehaviour or inability to perform the functions of that office,
may be exercised by Her Majesty, following an address by both Houses of Parliament.
A motion for the presentation of such an address may only be made by the Prime
Minister to the House of Commons; and by the Lord Chancellor to the House of
Lords. Before those motions may be made, a tribunal must have recommended to
the First Minister and deputy First Minister that that person be removed from
office. The Prime Minister, pending the consideration of making a motion for
the presentation of an address to Her Majesty, may suspend that person from
office.
- Appointments to the listed judicial offices may be made by the JAC following
receipt of notice from the First Minister and deputy First Minister requiring
that selection or recommendation for appointment. In each instance of such
notice, the JAC is required to inform the Office of the First Minister and
deputy First Minister of the outcome of their deliberations and to make a report,
of its decision, to the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister.
Upon receipt of that report, the First Minister and deputy First Minister may
require by notice the JAC to re-consider their decisions. The JAC may, following
their re-consideration, re-affirm their original selection or select a different
person - in both circumstances the JAC must inform the Office of the First
Minister and Deputy First Minister in the manner prescribed above. All decisions
for the selection of a person to be appointed by the JAC must be based solely
on merit.
- The power to remove a person from a listed judicial office, on the grounds
of misbehaviour or inability to perform the functions of that office, may be
exercised by the First Minister and deputy First Minister, with the agreement
of the Lord Chief Justice, following a recommendation from a tribunal. The
tribunal may, at any time, when it is considering whether to recommend that
such a person be removed from office, make a recommendation to the First Minister
and deputy First Minister that that person be suspended from office.
- In relation to complaints, the Lord Chief Justice must prepare, and publish,
a code of practice relating to the handling of complaints against a person
who holds a protected judicial office.
Part 2 - Law Officers and Public Prosecution Service
- Clause 20 makes provision for the First Minister and deputy First Minister
to appoint a person, who has at least ten years' standing as either a member
of the Bar of Northern Ireland or a solicitor of the Supreme Court of Northern
Ireland, to be Attorney General for Northern Ireland. Upon commencement of
this section, the Attorney General for England and Wales shall no longer be
Attorney General for Northern Ireland. The power to remove the Attorney General
for Northern Ireland from office has been given to the First Minister and deputy
First Minister, but may only be exercised following a recommendation of a tribunal,
which may be convened by the First Minister and deputy First Minister, whose
members are to be selected by the Lord Chancellor in accordance with the provisions
of clause 21.
- Clause 22 sets out the terms of appointment of the Attorney General for
Northern Ireland, who may not be appointed for a period of longer than five
years at a time and who is disqualified from being a member of the House of
Commons, the Northern Ireland Assembly or a local authority in Northern Ireland.
The Attorney General for Northern Ireland may participate in the proceedings
of the Assembly to the extent permitted by Standing Orders but may not vote.
The Attorney General for Northern Ireland must also submit an annual report
to the First Minister and deputy First Minister, which they shall lay before
the Assembly and then make arrangements for it to be published.
- Clause 25 makes provision for the office of Advocate General for Northern
Ireland, the functions of which shall be exercised by the Attorney General
for England and Wales. Schedule 5 makes further provision about the functions
of that office. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland may, by order,
make provision for the transfer of other functions to that office.
- Part 2 of the draft Bill also establishes a Public Prosecution Service to
be the single, independent prosecuting authority in Northern Ireland. It will
be the responsibility of the Prosecution Service to undertake all prosecutions
for both indictable and summary offences committed in Northern Ireland which
were previously the responsibility of the Director of Public Prosecutions or
the police (apart from fixed penalties for motoring offences).
- The Prosecution Service will have two statutory office holders: the Director
and Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, both of whom shall be appointed
by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland. The Director may also give advice
to the Police Service for Northern Ireland on prosecutorial matters.
Part 3 - Other new institutions
- Clauses 41 - 45 make provision for a Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice
who must carry out inspections of the following organisations: -
- the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Police Service of Northern
Ireland Reserve,
- Forensic Science Northern Ireland,
- the State Pathologist's Department,
- the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland,
- the Probation Board for Northern Ireland,
- the Northern Ireland Prison Service,
- the Juvenile Justice Board,
- any body or person (other than the Juvenile Justice Board) with whom the
Secretary of State has made arrangements for the provision of juvenile justice
centres or attendance centres,
- Health and Social Services Boards and Health and Social Services trusts,
and
- the Compensation Agency.
- The Chief Inspector must consult the Secretary of State and the Attorney
General for Northern Ireland when preparing his programme of inspections and
the Chief Inspector must prepare a report on each inspection for the Secretary
of State who shall lay each report before Parliament and arrange for it to
be published.
- Clauses 46 - 49 make provision for the establishment of a Law Commission
for Northern Ireland, which will review the criminal and civil law of Northern
Ireland, including procedure and practice, with a view to making recommendations
to Government for reform, codification, simplification and consolidation of
legislation. It will consist of a Chairperson and four other commissioners,
all of which shall be appointed by the Secretary of State.
- The Commission is required to provide advice and information to and receive
remits from Government. With the consent of the Secretary of State, the Commission
will provide advice and information to Northern Ireland departments and other
authorities or bodies on proposals for law reform or amendment of any branch
of the law of Northern Ireland.
Part 4 - Youth Justice
- Clauses 49 - 61 make provision for the youth justice system in Northern
Ireland. The aim of the youth justice system is to protect the public by preventing
offending by children. The draft Bill provides for three new orders. Those
orders are: -
- Reparation orders: A reparation order is a new sentence available
to courts dealing with child offenders in Northern Ireland. The reparation
ordered to be made by the child would be either to the victim of the offence
or some other person affected by it or to the community at large. The form
of reparation may be varied, for example it may take the form of repairing
property in cases of property damage or some community work.
- Community responsibility orders: Where a child is found guilty of
an offence for which the court could (if the offence were committed by an adult)
sentence him/her to a period of imprisonment, the court may make a community
responsibility order. Such an order will have two distinct components. The
first part will require the offender to attend a specific place for a few hours
at a time where they will receive "relevant instruction in citizenship". The
second part of the order will require the offender to carry out, for a specified
number of hours, such practical activities as the responsible officer considers
appropriate in the light of the instruction given to the offender.
- Custody care orders: A custody care order may only be imposed on
a child who has attained the age of 10 but is not yet 14 and who has been found
guilty of an offence for which the court could (if the offence had been committed
by an adult) sentence him/her to a period of imprisonment. A child, in respect
of whom a custody care order is made, would be held in secure accommodation
by an "appropriate authority" for a specified period (rather than being held
in a juvenile justice centre), and thereafter be under supervision for a further
period.
- The draft Bill also makes provision for a system of youth conferencing.
A youth conference is a meeting or series of meetings held to consider how
a child ought to be dealt with for an offence. The meetings will be under the
chairmanship of a person to be known as a youth conference co-ordinator. The
aim of the youth conference will be to devise a youth conference plan which
will propose how the child should be dealt with. The purpose of a youth conference
plan is to require the child to carry out specified actions in order to make
reparation for the offence, address the child's offending behaviour, and/or
meet the needs of the victim. The content of the plan is for the youth conference
to decide, from the various options provided for, such as apologising, making
reparation, or participating in activities designed to address offending behaviour,
offer education or assist with rehabilitation. The conference can propose any
combination of these options it wishes.
- There are two distinct types of youth conference: diversionary and court-ordered
youth conferences: -
- Diversionary youth conferences: A reference to a diversionary youth
conference may only be made by the Director of Public Prosecutions and would
be made at an early stage, either before proceedings had been instituted for
the offence or shortly after, but the Director can only make a reference if
the child admits that he has committed the offence.
- Court-ordered youth conferences: A court-ordered youth conference
would occur after a court had found a child guilty of an offence and provides
a way to consider how to deal with the child for the offence in question.
- Part 2 of the draft Bill also extends the youth justice provisions to 17
year olds and, in particular, provides that courts may make a juvenile justice
centre order.
Part 5 - Miscellaneous
- Clauses 62 - 73 set out further provisions in relation to the justice system.
In particular they set out arrangements for the display of the Royal Arms at
courthouses; make provision in relation to the rights of victims of crimes;
make provision in relation to community safety; empowers the Lord Chancellor
to direct that exceptional legal aid be available; empower the Lord Chancellor
to abolish the Northern Ireland Court Service and to transfer its functions;
and require the Northern Ireland Court Service to provide security in courts.
Part 6 - Supplementary
- Clauses 74 - 83 make supplementary provisions. They set out the commencement
arrangements, provisions for the exercise of order-making powers under the
Bill and the extent of the Bill. It also places limitations on the ability
of the Northern Ireland Assembly to legislate in some of the areas covered
by the Bill.
COMMITTEE'S CONSIDERATION OF
THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
- During the Committee's deliberations on the proposals for reform of the
criminal justice system in Northern Ireland, members considered a wide variety
of issues. The comments of the Committee are set out below under the following
headings: -
- General comments;
- Structural reform;
- Openness and transparency; and
- New approaches.
- Additionally, the Committee accepted that there were a number of areas where
it would be unable to reach consensus. In order to address these issues, the
Committee agreed to accept position papers from the political parties of the
Assembly which were represented on the Committee. The position papers submitted
by those parties are set out at Appendix 4.
top
GENERAL COMMENTS
Consultation period
- The Committee welcomed the opportunity to consider the proposals for reform
of the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland and recognised those proposals
as being of major significance for many years ahead. Given the importance of
these proposals the Committee considered that a full, proper and meaningful
consultation would be of vital importance if the proposals were going to have
the impact envisaged by the Criminal Justice Review Group (CJRG).
- The consultation on the proposals was launched on 12 November 2001 and originally
was due to close on 12 December 2001. This provided only 30-days for the Assembly,
and other bodies, to give a considered response to a draft Bill, which contained
83-clauses, and an implementation plan, which sets out action to be taken in
respect of 294 recommendations of the CJRG. The members of the Committee and
all witnesses that gave evidence, with the exception of the Northern Ireland
Office (NIO) and the Northern Ireland Court Service (NICtS), criticised the
period of consultation which was provided by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State, Des Browne.
- The Committee noted the NIO's commitment, as set out in their Equality Scheme,
"to provide a period for response of at least eight weeks and to begin consultation
as early as possible". Further to this, members noted that the Cabinet Office
Code of Practice on written consultations states that, "sufficient time should
be allowed for considered responses from all groups with an interest. Twelve
weeks should be the standard minimum period for consultation" and "Consultation
should never have to be shortened below an acceptable minimum for reasons of
departmental convenience, for example because a department has fallen behind
its own implementation schedule".
- Following representations from a number of sources, including the Committee,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State announced to Parliament, in response
to a written question on 29 November 2001, that he had decided to extend the
period of consultation, by a further four weeks, to 7 January 2002. Whereas
the Committee welcomed this announcement, it was considered that due regard
should have been observed in relation to both the Department's commitments
and the Cabinet Office guidelines.
Recommendation 1: That the Northern Ireland Office
should observe and comply with the Cabinet Office Code of Practice on written
consultations, when planning future written consultations.
Independence of the legal profession
- In their evidence to the Committee, representatives of the Law Society of
Northern Ireland (LSNI) highlighted the important role that is played by solicitors
in the criminal justice system. One of the key aspects of their role is that
they exercise their responsibilities in a manner "free from political, financial
or other influences that may affect [their] independence". This was recognised
by the CJRG in their report, which made particular reference to the role played
by defence lawyers and the nature of their relationship with their clients,
and the negative impact of a misunderstanding of that relationship.
- It was suggested by LSNI that a statement on the face of the legislation,
similar to that proposed at Clause 1, which safeguards the independence
of the Judiciary, should be included in the Bill. The Committee was supportive
of this suggestion and considered it to be reasonable to recognise, in statute,
the independence of the legal profession.
Recommendation 2: That a new clause be inserted which
acknowledges and safeguards the continuing independence and impartiality of
the legal profession.
Oversight of the implementation plan
- The members of the Committee noted the dearth of clear deadlines in relation
to the implementation plan. The Committee was also concerned that the lack
of clear targets for the CJRG's recommendations could lead to significant slippage
in the delivery of the Government's objectives. The Committee, therefore, considered
possible options to maintain the necessary momentum to drive forward the implementation
of the criminal justice reforms.
- In their evidence to the Committee, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
(NIHRC) suggested the appointment of an oversight commissioner - similar to
that which had been appointed in relation to the Patten Report on Policing
- to keep the progress towards the overall implementation of the proposals
under review. Whereas, that proposal was welcomed by a number of members of
the Committee, some concerns were raised about the possible negative impact
for the overall resources available for implementation, if they were diverted
in order to provide for such an appointment. However, the Committee agreed
that consideration should be given to the appointment of such a commissioner.
Recommendation 3: That the Secretary of State gives
consideration to the appointment of a commissioner with a remit to oversee
the implementation of the reform of the criminal justice system, having regard
to the resources available to him.
- The Committee also gave detailed consideration to other possible mechanisms
to oversee the on-going implementation of the reform proposals. One such option
was the establishment of a cross-departmental steering group comprising: senior
officials of the NIO; senior officials from the Office of the First Minister
and deputy First Minister; a consortia representing the interests of the various
agencies exercising statutory functions in relation to criminal justice matters;
and officers of the Northern Ireland Assembly. The Committee did not give its
endorsement to this proposal.
- The Committee agreed on the need to give measured and detailed consideration
to the review of criminal justice, given its importance as a constitutional
issue. The Committee acknowledged that the revision of the criminal justice
system would have far reaching implications for all stakeholders. The Committee
noted the potential impact there might be on the devolved administration and
concluded that the Northern Ireland Assembly should be afforded the opportunity
to be consulted, and comment, on criminal justice issues, pending devolution
of these responsibilities.
- On that basis, the Committee agreed that a Standing Committee of the Assembly
could be established to ensure that the proposals put forward by the Northern
Ireland Office meet the stated aims of criminal justice system which are to:
-
- deliver a fair and impartial system of justice to the community;
- be responsive to the community's concerns, and encourages community involvement
where appropriate;
- have the confidence of all parts of the community; and
- deliver justice efficiently and effectively.
Recommendation 4: That this Assembly considers the establishment
of a Standing Committee, at the earliest opportunity, to be known as the Committee
on Criminal Justice, with a remit to: -
(a) make recommendations to the Assembly on the ongoing implementation
of the Criminal Justice Review; and
(b) report to the Assembly on criminal justice matters which
have been referred to it for consideration.
Human rights and guiding principles
- The Committee noted the concerns of the NIHRC, which stated that "the draft
Justice (NI) Bill does not put Human Rights at the centre of the reforms in
the way in which the review recommended". Furthermore, the Committee noted
that this view was shared by a number of witnesses; notably the CAJ which expressed
concern at the lack of clear targets for, and apparent mechanisms to drive
forward, the recommendations in relation to human rights training.
- The Committee considered that a way of addressing this apparent shortfall
would be to incorporate, at the appropriate clauses of the draft Bill, references
to the accepted human rights standards. However, some members of the Committee
were concerned that this might delay the introduction of the draft Bill to
Westminster. The Committee agreed that, if this delay could be avoided, a reference
to the centrality and importance of human rights to the justice system should
be made in the relevant clauses.
Recommendation 5: That the Secretary of State gives
consideration to the revision of the clauses of the draft Bill to include
references to the accepted human rights standards which would acknowledge
the principle that human rights are central to the criminal justice system.
Symbols and declarations
- The Committee considered the issues of symbols and declarations in the wider
context of court buildings and proceedings but was unable to reach a consensus.
Members noted that these issues were likely to be addressed in papers submitted
by those political parties of the Assembly which were represented on the Committee.
top
STRUCTURAL REFORM
Devolution of justice matters
- The Committee considered the implications of the transfer of criminal justice
matters to the devolved administration and the consequential impact on the
operation and procedures of the Assembly.
- The Committee considered where justice matters would be best placed, post
devolution. The Committee noted that the Review recommended the creation, on
devolution, of a single Department of Justice, headed by a Minister for Justice.
The Committee also explored the option of incorporating the justice functions
within the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. It was agreed
that these options could be further considered by the proposed Standing Committee
on Criminal Justice, suggested in this Report.
- The Committee also explored the possibility of adding existing functions
of the devolved administration to a new department. The Committee noted that
victims issues are currently split between the Northern Ireland Office and
the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister and that some human
rights responsibilities, currently rest with that office. The Committee concluded
that the proposed Standing Committee could further explore these matters through
liaison with the Northern Ireland Office and the Office of the First Minister
and deputy First Minister.
Recommendation 6: That the proposed Standing Committee
on Criminal Justice make recommendations to the Assembly - to be considered
by the Northern Ireland Office and the Northern Ireland Executive - on the
form that a Department of Justice may take, following devolution.
Attorney General for Northern Ireland
- The Committee considered the role and functions of an Attorney General where
they affect the proceedings of the Assembly and acknowledged that provision
must be made for his/her participation in the proceedings of the Assembly.
The Committee determined that a clear set of procedures, in respect of the
following areas of business, will need to be resolved: -
- Questions;
- Statements;
- Voting;
- Quorum; and
- Register of Interests.
The Committee agreed that the Committee on Procedures might
be the most appropriate Committee to resolve these issues.
Recommendation 7: That the Committee on Procedures examine
and make recommendations to the Assembly on the extent to which the Attorney
General may participate in the proceedings of the Assembly having due regard
to best practice in other jurisdictions.
- The Committee also determined that consideration needs to be given to the
additional functions, proposed in the Review, which may be given to the Attorney
General. Those functions were: -
- Senior legal adviser to the Northern Ireland Executive;
- Responsibility for legislative draftsmen;
- The Executive's link with the Law Commission; and
- Responsibility for human rights-proofing legislation.
Recommendation 8: That, post devolution, the appropriate
steps are taken to define the future role and extent of the Attorney General's
responsibilities.
Public Prosecution Service
- The Committee noted that the draft Bill establishes a new Public Prosecution
Service for Northern Ireland which would be a single independent prosecution
service responsible for undertaking all criminal prosecutions, including those
currently undertaken by the Police Service for Northern Ireland.
- The Committee, and a number of witnesses, expressed concern on the issue
of the resources required for creating this new service. The Committee noted
the Report of Lord Glidewell into the GB Crown Prosecution Service, which
stated that this service was too centralised and bureaucratic. The Report
also highlighted serious resource deficiencies in their move to a new
prosecution service.
Recommendation 9: That adequate resources be guaranteed
to enable the Prosecution Service to carry out its functions.
- The Committee considered the issue of disclosure of reasons for bringing a
prosecution. The Committee noted the evidence provided by the CAJ which
stated:
"The recommendation of the Review was balanced and positive and argued that
the balance should shift towards the giving of reasons but accepted that there
may be instances where this was not possible because it could conflict with
the interests of justice. Essentially the government response is a refusal
to accept this recommendation. Nothing is proposed to implement the shift
towards giving reasons which the Review recommended."
The Committee concluded that the new Prosecution Service should
draw up a code of practice which clearly defines the main elements of its
decision-making process with particular regard to the reasons for bringing
prosecutions.
Recommendation 10: That greater transparency should
be a feature of the decision-making process of the new Public Prosecution
Service.
Role of the Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI)
- The Committee noted evidence from PBNI, in which serious concerns were
expressed about the PBNI becoming a next-steps agency. The Chief Executive
stated:
"We are trusted as a neutral body which goes impartially about its job and
has no political or sectional interests. Communities are more willing and
ready to work with us than with central Government. In other next steps agencies,
such as employment ones, we do not see the same level of community involvement
other than at an advisory level, and that is not close enough for delivering
the service that we want to deliver, which involves working with communities."
- The Committee shared the views put forward by PBNI and recognised, and
valued, the essential work carried out by that body. It, therefore,
recommended that the PBNI remain an independent and impartial body.
Recommendation 11: That the Probation Board of Northern
Ireland should remain independent and impartial.
top
OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY
- The Committee noted that the Lord Chancellor is currently responsible for
the judicial appointment process and that this responsibility will be devolved
to the First Minister and deputy First Minister. The Committee considered that
lay appointees, which may be made by the First Minister and deputy First Minister,
to the Judicial Appointments Commission, may not carry sufficient weight in
the appointments process given the predominance of the judicial membership.
The Committee explored the possibility of replacing the lay members of the
Judicial Appointments Commission with political representatives, similar to
the Northern Ireland Policing Board. Some members supported this amendment
to the proposed membership of the Judicial Appointments Commission. However,
there was no agreement on this issue. The Committee agreed that this matter
should be considered by the Secretary of State.
- The Committee noted that the First Minister and deputy First Minister had
the power to convene a tribunal to remove the Attorney General from office.
The Committee agreed that this unilateral power would not reflect the
primacy that the Assembly will have, following the devolution of justice
matters, and that the draft Bill should be amended to provide scope for the
Assembly to have an input in this area. The Committee agreed that the power
to convene a tribunal to consider removing the Attorney General from office
should be given to the Assembly.
Recommendation 12: That clause 21(3) of the draft
Bill be amended to provide authority for the Assembly to convene a tribunal
following a resolution of the Assembly that is passed with the support of
a number of members of the Assembly which equals or exceeds two thirds of
the total number of seats in the Assembly.
top
NEW APPROACHES
Restorative justice
- The Committee noted the proposals to set up a system "youth conferencing"
and a community restorative justice scheme. In its consideration of evidence
from the Criminal Bar Association, the Committee concurred with its view that
the lack of legal advice in advance of a youth conference may be prejudicial
to the rights of the child.
Recommendation 13: That young people are granted access
to legal representation in advance of a youth conference.
- In their evidence to the Committee, the PBNI expressed serious concerns
about their role in the proposed youth conferencing system. They considered
there to be merit in compiling a "suitability" report to the
prosecutor in advance of any final decision being made on whether to direct
a young person to a youth conference. However, no such provisions have been
made in the draft Bill. The Committee shared the concerns of the PBNI and
agreed that such a report would be appropriate.
Recommendation 14: That the Northern Ireland Court
Service clearly define the role and responsibilities of the Probation Board
for Northern Ireland in the youth conferencing process.
- The Committee expressed concerns on the whole area of restorative justice,
it raised many questions on how the proposed system would integrate into existing
court practices. The Committee considered that further work is required to
take on-board the experiences of existing restorative justice programmes and
on that basis, determined that the proposed Standing Committee on Criminal
Justice could further investigate this crucial area of reform. The Committee
considered that pilot programmes should be introduced in distinct geographical
areas of Northern Ireland in order to provide appropriate methods of assessment,
highlighting discrepancies in their application and outcomes.
Recommendation 15: That the Northern Ireland Office
carry out additional research into the practical outworking of the Restorative
Justice proposals.
Recommendation 16: That the Northern Ireland Office
consider setting up pilot projects which will lead to a restorative justice
programme in which the whole community will have confidence.
Recommendation 17: That the proposed Standing Committee
on Criminal Justice examines, in greater detail, the whole area of restorative
justice.
top
CONCLUSION
- The Committee recognised that the reform of criminal justice has been both
difficult and time-consuming. Nevertheless, they adjudged that providing a
short period for consultation, having accepted the tight legislative timetable,
was not appropriate. The draft Bill and proposed implementation plan will require
ongoing scrutiny, continued development and further refinement. The Committee
recognised the need for continued liaison with the Northern Ireland Office
and the criminal justice agencies in the lead up to the devolution of justice
matters to the Northern Ireland Assembly.
top
APPENDIX 1
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
Monday 26 November 2001
Tuesday 27 November 2001
Thursday 29 November 2001
Tuesday 4 December 2001
Tuesday 11 December 2001
Thursday 13 December 2001
Monday 8 January 2002
MONDAY 26 NOVEMBER 2001
ROOM 144 PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS.
Present: Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton, Chairperson
Mrs Eileen Bell MLA, Deputy Chairperson
Mr Alex Attwood MLA
Mr Gregory Campbell MLA
Mr David Ervine MLA
Sir John Gorman MLA
Mr Alban Maginness MLA
Mr Mitchel McLaughlin MLA
Mrs Mary Nelis MLA
Mr Ian Paisley Jnr MLA
Attendees: Mr Tony Logue, Clerk of Ad hoc Committees
Mr Damien McVeigh
Mr Hugh Widdis
11.33am: The meeting opened in private session-the Clerk in
the Chair.
1. Apologies
No apologies were received.
2. Election of Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson
The Clerk called for nominations for the position of Committee
Chairperson.
11.37am: Mr Shipley Dalton joined the meeting.
Sir John Gorman proposed that: Mr Shipley Dalton be the Chairperson
of this Committee. Mr Paisley seconded this and the nomination was accepted.
On there being no further nominations the Clerk put the question
without debate.
Resolved, that Mr Shipley Dalton, being the only candidate
proposed, be Chairperson of this Committee.
11.38am: Mr Shipley Dalton in the Chair.
The Chairperson thanked members for their support and sought
nominations for the position of Committee Deputy Chairperson. Mr Maginness
proposed that: Mrs Bell be the Deputy Chairperson of this Committee. Mrs Nelis
seconded this and the nomination was accepted.
On there being no further nominations the Chairperson put the
question without debate.
Resolved, that Mrs Bell, being the only candidate proposed,
be Deputy Chairperson of this Committee.
3. Declaration of Interests
The Chairperson asked members to declare any relevant interests.
The following members declared their interests as set out below-
- Membership of the Law Society of Northern Ireland; and
- Membership of the Northern Ireland Policing Board.
- Membership of the Probation Board for Northern Ireland.
- Membership of the General Council of the Bar of Northern Ireland.
- Membership of the General Council of the Bar of Northern Ireland.
- Membership of the Northern Ireland Policing Board.
4. Procedures of the Committee
11.39am: Mr Ervine joined the meeting.
The Chairperson referred members to a memorandum from the Committee
Clerk on the procedures of the Committee contained in their briefing papers.
Resolved,
- Voting: the Committee agreed that in the absence of consensus, simple majority
would determine all decisions.
- Public meetings: the Committee agreed that it would hold all evidence sessions
in public.
- Deputies: the Committee agreed to permit the use of deputies.
5. Forward work programme
The Committee noted a memorandum from the Committee Clerk
setting out a proposed forward work programme. Following debate, members' unanimously
agreed that the deadline by which the Committee must submit its report
was totally unworkable and that the Chairperson would take forward a motion
in the Assembly to extend that deadline.
The Committee agreed to invite the following bodies to
give evidence-
- The Committee on the Administration of Justice;
- The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland
- The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland;
- The General Council of the Bar of Northern Ireland;
- The Law Society of Northern Ireland;
- The Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland;
- The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission;
- The Northern Ireland Office; and
- The Probation Board for Northern Ireland.
Further to this, the Committee agreed to invite written
submissions from the political parties of the Assembly that are represented
on the Committee.
6. Any other business
No other matters were raised.
7. Date and time of next meeting
The Committee agreed that it would next meet on Tuesday,
27 November 2001.
12.15am: The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton MLA
CHAIRPERSON
27 November 2001
TUESDAY 27 NOVEMBER 2001
ROOM 152 PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS.
Present: Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton, Chairperson
Mrs Eileen Bell MLA, Deputy Chairperson
Mr Gregory Campbell MLA
Sir John Gorman MLA
Mr Alban Maginness MLA
Mr Mitchel McLaughlin MLA
Mrs Mary Nelis MLA
Mr Ian Paisley Jnr MLA
Attendees: Mr Tony Logue, Clerk of Ad hoc Committees
Mr Damien McVeigh
Mr Percy Johnston
Mr Hugh Widdis
Apologies: Mr David Ervine MLA
2.35pm: The meeting opened in private session-Mr Shipley Dalton
in the Chair.
1. Apologies
The apology was noted.
2. Draft Minutes of Proceedings
Resolved, that the draft Minutes of Proceedings for
Monday, 26 November 2001 be agreed.
3. Matters arising
2.38pm: Mr Maginness joined the meeting.
Members noted that a motion had been tabled with the
Business Committee to amend the original resolution of the Assembly that established
the Ad hoc Committee. It was agreed that the Chairperson should speak
on the Committee's behalf during the plenary session.
2.44pm: Mr Paisley joined the meeting.
The Clerk tabled an amended work programme for the Committee;
it was agreed that, subject to the Assembly approving the motion to extend
the Committee's terms of reference, the Committee would adhere to the work programme,
as proposed. The Chairperson sought members' views on the principle of meeting
during the recess period; it was agreed that the Committee would, if
necessary, meet during the week commencing Monday, 17 December 2001.
It was noted that the Northern Ireland Policing Board
would be on an official visit to the United States of America, week commencing
Monday, 3 December 2001. The Chairperson requested that those members of the
Committee who would be participating in that visit should nominate deputies
to serve on the Committee during their absence.
4. Criminal Justice Implementation Plan
Members noted a research paper, prepared by the Assembly's
Research & Library Services, on the Criminal Justice Implementation Plan.
2.50pm: The Chairperson called Mr Widdis to the table.
During the question-and-answer session it was agreed that the
Committee should seek a further paper on the Public Prosecution Service from
Research & Library Services. The Chairperson requested that any additional
requests for research, on behalf of the Committee, should be directed through
the Clerk.
3.05pm: Mrs Bell left the meeting.
3.11pm: Mr Maginness left the meeting.
3.45pm: Mr Campbell left the meeting.
5. Draft Justice (NI) Bill: First Reading
3.50pm: The Chairperson called Mr Johnston to the table.
Members conducted an initial Article-by-Article reading of the
draft Justice (NI) Bill with assistance from the Assembly Legal Advisor.
6. Any other business
No other matters were raised.
7. Date and time of next meeting
The Committee agreed that it would next meet on Thursday,
29 November 2001.
4.17pm: The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
Mr Duncan Shipley Dalton MLA
CHAIRPERSON
top
Next
>>
|