2
WEDNES, AY, MAY 1, 1985
J
+AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, SIR, I HOLD AN OFFICE WITH A HEAVY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE RULE OF LAW AND THE PRESERVATION OF CONFIDENCE IN OUR LEGAL INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR PROCESSES, EVEN IF THIS COUNCIL WERE MINDED TO PASS THIS BILL, IT WOULD IN MY JUDGMENT BE FRAUGHT WITH DANGER TO INTRODUCE A MODE OF TRIAL THAT DID NOT COMM AND BROAD SUPPORT. IT IS NO LONGER A QUESTION OF WHETHER THE BILL'S PROPOSALS ARE GOOD ONES OR THE BEST OF THE ALTERNATIVES. IT IS A QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY WOULD BE GENERALLY REGARDED AS A BASIS FOR A FAIR TRIAL IF THEY WERE PASSED INTO LAW. PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE JUSTICE OF OUR TRIAL PROCEDURE IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE CHOICE BETWEEN ONE MODE OF TRIAL AND ANOTHER. AND THE STRENGTH OF FEELINGS THAT PRESENTLY RUN AGAINST THE PASSAGE OF THIS BILL AT THIS TIME IN THIS FORM CREATES A REAL RISK OF DAMAGING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN A JUST VERDICT, WHATEVER THE MERITS OF THE PROPOSAL MAY BE.
+SIR, THE RECENT CONTROVERSY OVER THE BILL HAS TAKEN MANY BY SURPRISE. BUT OUT OF IT HAS COME A VARIETY OF SUGGESTIONS, FROM OPPONENTS AND FROM SUPPORTERS ALIKE, TRYING TO FIND WAYS OF EASING THE PROBLEMS THAT EXIST. ALL OF THEM DESERVE TO BE CALMLY AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED. AND THEREFORE WELCOME THE APPOINTMENT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT WILL AFFORD BOTH THE COMMUNITY AND MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL MORE TIME TO FIND THE RIGHT WAY FORWARD IN A DIFFICULT AREA.
+1N ENGLAND TOO, PROPOSALS TO REPLACE TRI AL BY JURY IN THESE CASES WERE PUT FORWARD IN 1983 BY A NUMBER OF DISTINGUISHED JUDGES AND WRITERS, INCLUDING LORD HALLSHAM THE LORD CHANCELLOR, LORD ROSKILL HIMSELF AND THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, LORD LANE, WHO MADE HIS VIEWS KNOWN TO THE 7TH COMMONWEALTH LAW CONFERENCE WHICH WAS HELD HERE IN HONG KONG IN THAT YEAR. THE ROSKILL COMMITTEE WAS SET UP IN CONSEQUENCE SOME TWELVE MONTHS AGO. LATEST REPORTS SUGGEST THAT THE STRONG SUPPORT WHICH SEEMED TO EXIST FOR THIS REFORM IN ENGLAND HAS ALSO FALLEN AWAY. THE ROSKILL COMMITTEE HAS RECEIVED MANY SUBMISSIONS. SIMILAR TO THOSE RECEIVED BY UMELCO, OPPOSED TO ANY DEPARTURE FROM TRIAL BY JURY.
SO IN ENGLAND AS WELL, THE SUPPORTERS OF REFORM HAVE FOUND THEMSELVES OPPOSED BY LEGAL PROFESSIONALS AND ORGANISATIONS WHO FAVOUR NO CHANGE FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER. AND IN DUE COURSE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT THE ROSKILL COMMITTEE MAKES OF IT ALL.
/+IT IS ...