Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008

Justice secretary, Jack Straw (Lab, Blackburn),  introduced a Bill to make provision for the making of orders for securing the anonymity of witnesses in criminal proceedings.

All stages of the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill were taken in the Commons yesterday.

The Bill introduces emergency legislation protecting the rights of witnesses to give evidence anonymously in trials.

Junior justice minister, Maria Eagle, led the debate.  She outlined the timetable for debating the Bill - six hours of debate in two segments. 

Eagle explained that the consensus to pursue this legislation had emerged following a recent controversial ruling by the Law Lords in the case of Davis.  She said: 

“Failure to act quickly could lead to a significant number of ongoing and pending trials having to be abandoned and, potentially, to a large number of appeals against convictions secured, to a greater or lesser extent, on the basis of evidence provided by anonymous witnesses.”

The minister conceded that the government would accept a sunset clause so that the legislation may lapse at a later date.

Eagle outlined the government’s intention to bring in further legislation within which the contents of this Bill would be subsumed, permitting full parliamentary scrutiny in the normal way at a later stage.

Justice secretary, Jack Straw, led the second reading of the Bill.  He referred to crimes relating to guns, gangs and drugs, stating:

“Anonymised evidence and the safety of key witnesses are fundamental to getting the nasty, greedy and ruthless criminals who perpetrate those crimes off the streets.”

Straw stated his intention for the Bill to receive Royal Assent before the summer recess. 

He explained that, of the total number of cases in which witness anonymity is used, a large proportion involve undercover police officers or agents.  He said: “I do not think that anybody would argue that we should not routinely protect their identity.”

Shadow justice secretary, Nick Herbert, agreed that the uncertainty following the Lords ruling needs to be addressed quickly.  He confirmed his party’s support for the principle behind the legislation but highlighted some concerns about the scope of the Bill. 

Herbert stated:

“If justice can be done only through the use of anonymous evidence, the courts should have the power to hear that evidence. However, it should be used out of necessity to secure justice, not out of convenience to secure convictions. Its use should be exceptional, not routine, and the court must decide whether the risk of intimidation justifies it.”

David Howarth spoke for the Liberal Democrats.  He referred to the balance that needs to be struck in addressing the threat of witness intimidation and the threat of unfair trials.

The Bill was amended in committee, received its third reading and was passed to the Lords.

House of Commons

First reading: July 4 2008 [HC Bill 134]

Second reading: July 8 2008

Committee stage: July 8 2008

Report stage: July 8 2008

Third reading: July 8 2008

House of Lords

First reading: July 9 2008 [HL Bill 76]

Second reading: July 10 2008

Committee stage: July 15 2008

Report stage: July 15 2008

Third reading: July 15 2008

Consideration of Lords Amendments: July 16 2008 [HC Bill 140]

Royal Assent: July 21 2008