77
Costs in Criminal Cases Bill
Following is the speech by the Attorney General, the Hon Jeremy Mathews, in moving the second reading of the Costs in Criminal Cases Bill in the Legislative Council today (Thursday):
Mr President,
I move that the Costs in Criminal Cases Bill be read a second time.
The purpose of this Bill is to reform the existing law and practice governing the award of costs in criminal cases by removing anomalies and inconsistencies and by providing a clear set of principles applicable to all levels of criminal courts.
Defence Costs
I will deal, first, with the Bill's proposals concerning defence costs. At present, in the magistrates court, costs may be awarded to a defendant who has been acquitted only if the magistrate is satisfied that the proceedings ought not to have been instituted or pursued. But in the High Court and District Court, a different test applies, in that costs are normally to be awarded to an acquitted defendant unless there are positive reasons for their not being so awarded, namely that he has brought suspicion on himself and has misled the prosecution into thinking the case against him is stronger than it is. If the defendant is legally-aided, then any award of costs will be limited to the extent of any contribution he has made towards the costs of his defence.
Thus, in the magistrates courts, an acquitted person carries the burden of demonstrating that the prosecution is at fault; in the District Court and High Court, he will normally be awarded costs unless he is at fault or the acquittal turns on a technicality.
It is difficult to justify the different principles applicable in the award of costs in criminal proceedings. The Bill, therefore, provides that the same guiding principles for the award of costs should apply in all courts, and that the court should be given a complete discretion on the question of costs. That discretion should normally be exercised in favour of the acquitted person unless there should be positive reasons for not so doing.
Page 90Page 91