Clause 10
The amendments do not meet the objections previously raised.
The opportunity now given to a public servant under investigation of making representations to the Attorney-General was always
available to him: no prosecution would in any event be instituted
without preliminary enquiries in the course of which it would be
open to the person under investigation to make a statement if he wished to do so.
We remain opposed in principle to this clause. Although the
prosecution would first have to show that the accused had been
maintaining a high standard of living, or possessed or had possessed
property disproportionate to his official emoluments, the accused could then be convicted if he remained silent even though there was
no evidence of his having committed any offence. It continues to be
our view that possession of unexplained property should not be made a criminal offence but should be dealt with under disciplinary regulations.
(attached ship)
The present marginal note should in any case (it is considered) read: "Unexplained possession of resources.
Clause 13
Having regard to the definition of a public servant in Clause 2,
Clause 13 means that an employee of one of the corporations named
in the Schedule might be given special powers of investigation.
This was not intended?
Clause 14
We maintain that this clause breaches a fundamental principle of the British judicial system in that it may be used to compel a
G
person whose activities are under investigation to make an
incriminating statement during the investigation and before charges
are even contemplated. This is to be found in the French investigatory procedure, but is a fundamental departure from British
principles.
/The provisions
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.