123 / 294
Accused could lose Major Court Rights
Th e abolition of ma j or traditional safeguards of the
criminal process is recommended in the forthcoming
report of the Criminal Law Revision Committee, which
may he published next month at the earliest.
The report, which is bound to create a ma j or sensa-
tion in Parliament and legal circles, is now being consid-
ered by the Home Secretary. It recommends the aboli-
tion of the police caution, the general admissibility in
evidence of previous convictions, and the compulsory
appearance of the accused as a witness.
T h e abolition of the caution was foreshadowed last
year by Lord Parker in an interview on the occasion of
his retirement as Lord Chief Justice. His successor, Lord
Widgery, also favours the committee's approach on this
issue; this is not surprising.
T h e police caution, warning a suspect that he need
not say anything, was developed at the beginning of the
eighteenth century. Its origin was the belief that self-
incriminatory statements should he free from the taint
of unfairness and that once a person becomes a suspect
he should he reminded of his right to remain silent lest
through ignorance he he trapped into increasing the
evidence against him.
T h e committee has rejected as unworkable the sug-
gestion by the legal journal
Justice
, that interrogation
of suspects should be conducted before magistrates. It
has also rejected the proposal that the result of police
interrogations should only he admissible as evidence if
tape-recorded. T h e only protection for the suspect apart
from the general law regarding assault will be the com-
mon law doctrine that an admission or confession must
he voluntary.
Accused must go into witness box
Th e committee recommends that when the case comes
to court the accused should he required to go into the
witness box. At present he has the choice of remaining
silent in the dock or of making an unsworn statement
(on which he cannot he crossexamined) or of giving
evidence.
Und er the proposed new system he could refuse to
answer questions and would not he punishable for con-
tempt if he did so. But his refusal would be open and
public and the jury would draw the appropriate con-
clusions.
1 he right to silence in court has been part of our
system of criminal trial since the beginning of the
eighteenth century. T he old ecclesiastical courts and
the Star Chamber had the power to summon a defen-
dant and to examine him on oath. T h e abuse of these
powers and in particular their association with the rack
and other means of torture led to a deep-seated feeling
that the right to silence was a fundamental feature of
the English legal system.
In recommending, by a majority, the general admissi-
bility in evidence of previous convictions, the committee
went further than the police themselves have suggested.
This change, if implemented, would probably have an
even more important effect on the outcome of trials
than any of the committee's other proposals. Previous
convictions are at present normally excluded on the
ground that thev would have an unduly prejudicial
effect on the mind of the jury.
T h e chief rationale for the committee's hard-line
approach has been its belief that the present rules
are
based too much on outdated theories of fair play inap-
propriate in the context of the present war on profes-
sional crime. In particular, the committee was per-
suaded that too many guilty defendants now escape
conviction.
The Home Secretary told the House of Commons on
Ma r ch 17th that the rate of acquittals by juries in both
1969 and 1970 had been as high as 50 per cent.
The Criminal Law Revision Committee is a particu-
larly weighty one. It is chaired by Lord Justice Edmund
Davies, who sentenced the mail train robbers. Its mem-
bers include six other judges, a barrister who has re-
cently been appointed a judge, the Director of Public
Prosecutions, the chief metropolitan magistrate, a senior
legal adviser to the Home Office, three academic law-
yers, a solicitor, and a justice's clerk.
Th e report, which has been eight years in preparation,
will be published with a draft Bill to give effect to its
recommendations. It is thought that the Government
will probably introduce the Bill quickly before informed
opposition to the report has had time to build up.
The Guardian
(7th April 1972)
Perfect trust
Save your staff (and your-
self!) dealing with all the troublesome
detail work connected with Trusts,
Executorships, Administrations and
Personal Taxation — let the Ulster
Bank Dublin Trust Company serve you
and your clients. The Company can
deal confidentially and expertly with
every aspect of these activities and
provide continuity of management un-
affected by the usual dangers of death
or incapacity which threaten personal
Trustees. The Ulster Bank Dublin Trust
Company is a Republic of Ireland
resident for tax purposes and is a
member of the National Westminster
Bank Group.
For full details
please write or telephone for copies
of the latest brochure to
A
ULSTER B NK DUBLIN
TRUST COMPANY
College Green, Dublin 2. Tel: 777623.
122