Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008

Last updated

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 [1]
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (HM Government).svg
Long title An Act to make provision for the making of orders for securing the anonymity of witnesses in criminal proceedings.
Citation 2008 c. 15
Introduced by Jack Straw
Territorial extent  England and Wales and Northern Ireland (civilian law);
United Kingdom (military law)
Dates
Royal assent 21 July 2008
Commencement 21 July 2008 [2]
Status: Repealed
History of passage through Parliament
Text of statute as originally enacted
Revised text of statute as amended

The Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 (c. 15) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was a piece of emergency legislation and was introduced by the Secretary of State for Justice, Jack Straw, in order to overturn the judgement of the House of Lords in R v Davis and permit the use of anonymous witnesses in criminal trials in special circumstances.

Contents

Provisions

The Act abolished the existing common law rules on anonymity of witnesses and replaced them with a framework in which witness anonymity orders would be granted by the Court on the application of the prosecutor or defendant. Section 2 of the Act set out the terms which could be included in such orders, such as withholding of identity, protection from certain types of questioning, and also authorises visual screening of the witness from the defendant (but not from the judge, jury or any interpreter required by the witness). Section 4 set out the conditions which had to be satisfied before an anonymity order could be made; they were

The Act contained a sunset clause which stated that the Act would expire on 31 December 2009 (although Parliament could authorise extensions of 12 months at a time). This was because of the emergency nature of the bill, and because Parliament was already expected to debate a new criminal justice bill before the Act expired, in which further attention was to be given to the law on anonymous witnesses.

The Act was replaced by sections 86 to 97 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. [3] Section 96 repealed most of the 2008 Act. [4] These sections came into force on 1 January 2010. [5]

Criticism

Geoffrey Robertson, QC argued that the Act was a "perjurer's charter," describing the proposed changes as "the most serious single assault on liberty in memory." [6] He wrote

Defendants could be imprisoned for life solely on secret evidence they can never test by cross-examination so as to reveal, for example, a witness's malice or personal animosity; spiteful or score-settling motives; a reputation for telling lies or devious relationships with the police. [6]

He further argued that Jack Straw's statement that the Bill conformed with the European Convention on Human Rights was incorrect:

It does not: [A]rticle six of the [C]onvention says that "everyone charged with a criminal offence" has, at minimum, a right "to examine or have examined witnesses against him" and you cannot examine a distorted voice. [6]

Legislative history

R v Davis was decided by the House of Lords on 18 June 2008. The bill to overturn the Lords' judgement was introduced by Justice Secretary Jack Straw on 4 July 2008. [7] The bill received its third reading in the House of Commons on 8 July and a third reading in the House of Lords on 15 July. On 16 July, the Commons approved the Lords Amendments. [7] The bill became effective upon royal assent, which it received on 21 July. [8]

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law. In civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. Variation in common law countries is the peremptory plea, which may take the specific forms of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. These doctrines appear to have originated in ancient Roman law, in the broader principle non bis in idem.

Perjury is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, intended to deal with the Law Lords' ruling of 16 December 2004 that the detention without trial of eight foreigners at HM Prison Belmarsh under Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was unlawful, being incompatible with European human rights laws.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is a wide-ranging measure introduced to modernise many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Large portions of the act were repealed and replaced by the Sentencing Act 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treason Act 1695</span> English and British legislation

The Treason Act 1695 is an Act of the Parliament of England which laid down rules of evidence and procedure in high treason trials. It was passed by the English Parliament but was extended to cover Scotland in 1708 and Ireland in 1821. Some of it is still in force today.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sedition Act 1661</span> Mostly superseded United Kingdom Law

The Sedition Act 1661 was an Act of the Parliament of England, although it was extended to Scotland in 1708. Passed shortly after the Restoration of Charles II, it is no longer in force, but some of its provisions continue to survive today in the Treason Act 1695 and the Treason Felony Act 1848. One clause which was included in the Treason Act 1695 was later adapted for the United States Constitution.

In English law, provocation was a mitigatory defence to murder which had taken many guises over generations many of which had been strongly disapproved and modified. In closing decades, in widely upheld form, it amounted to proving a reasonable total loss of control as a response to another's objectively provocative conduct sufficient to convert what would otherwise have been murder into manslaughter. It only applied to murder. It was abolished on 4 October 2010 by section 56(1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, but thereby replaced by the superseding—and more precisely worded—loss of control.

A rape shield law is a law that limits the ability to introduce evidence or cross-examine rape complainants about their past sexual behaviour. The term also refers to a law that prohibits the publication of the identity of an alleged rape victim.

From 2000 to 2015, the British Parliament passed a series of Terrorism Acts that were aimed at terrorism in general, rather than specifically focused on terrorism related to Northern Ireland. The timings were influenced by the September 11, 2001 attacks and 7 July London bombings, as well as the politics of the global War on Terrorism, according to the politicians who announce them as their response to a terrorism act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is concerned with criminal justice and concentrates upon legal protection and assistance to victims of crime, particularly domestic violence. It also expands the provision for trials without a jury, brings in new rules for trials for causing the death of a child or vulnerable adult, and permits bailiffs to use force to enter homes.

The hearsay provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 reformed the common law relating to the admissibility of hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings begun on or after 4 April 2005.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which makes significant changes in many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In particular, it changes the law relating to custodial sentences and the early release of prisoners to reduce prison overcrowding, which reached crisis levels in 2008. It also reduces the right of prison officers to take industrial action, and changed the law on the deportation of foreign criminals. It received royal assent on 8 May 2008, but most of its provisions came into force on various later dates. Many sections came into force on 14 July 2008.

R v Davis [2008] UKHL 36 is a decision of the United Kingdom House of Lords which considered the permissibility of allowing witnesses to give evidence anonymously. In 2002 two men were shot and killed at a party, allegedly by the defendant, Ian Davis. He was extradited from the United States and tried at the Central Criminal Court for two counts of murder in 2004. He was convicted by the jury and appealed. The decision of the House of Lords in June 2008 led to Parliament passing the Criminal Evidence Act 2008 a month later. This legislation was later replaced by sections 86 to 97 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.

Saunders v. the United Kingdom was a legal case heard by the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right against self-incrimination and the presumption of innocence as included in the European Convention on Human Rights Article 6 paragraphs 1 and 2.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Coroners and Justice Act 2009</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It changed the law on coroners and criminal justice in England and Wales.

<i>R v Horncastle</i>

R v Horncastle & Others[2009] UKSC 14 was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom regarding hearsay evidence and the compatibility of UK hearsay law with the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The case represents another stage in the judicial dialogue between the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the higher courts of the United Kingdom about whether it is acceptable to base convictions "solely or to a decisive extent" on evidence made by a witness who is identified but does not appear in court.

United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 U.S. 858 (1982), is a United States Supreme Court case that determined the constitutionality of deporting aliens who might give testimony in criminal alien smuggling prosecutions. Because deporting alien witnesses might take away a testimony that would be both “material and favorable” to the defendant, it gives rise to a potential motion from the defense to dismiss the indictment under the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Procedure Act 1865</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Procedure Act 1865, commonly known as Denman's Act, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 1988</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 1988 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evidence Act 2006</span> Act of Parliament in New Zealand

The Evidence Act 2006 is an Act of the Parliament of New Zealand that codifies the laws of evidence. When enacted, the Act drew together the common law and statutory provisions relating to evidence into one comprehensive scheme, replacing most of the previous evidence law on the admissibility and use of evidence in court proceedings.

References

  1. The citation of this Act by this short title is authorised by section 15(1) of this Act.
  2. The Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008, section 13
  3. Text of the legislation - Sections 86-97 of Coroners and Justice Act 2009 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk .
  4. Text of the legislation- Section 96 - Coroners and Justice Act as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk .
  5. Text of the legislation- Section 182(3)(a) - Coroners and Justice Act] as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk .
  6. 1 2 3 Robertson, Geoffrey (8 July 2008). "There can be no fair trials with this perjurer's charter". The Guardian . London. Retrieved 8 August 2008.
  7. 1 2 "Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill 2007-08". Archived from the original on 19 July 2008. Retrieved 10 July 2008.
  8. Lords Hansard