Coroners and Justice Bill — Schedule 1 — Explicit Approval of Lord Chief Justice Required for Minister to Suspend Coroner's Inquiry -rejected — 12 Nov 2009 at 12:45

The majority No voters rejected an amendment^[1] to the Coroners and Justice Bill. The amendment would have required the explicit approval of the head of the judiciary before a government minister could suspend an inquest and replace it with an inquiry^[2].

The Lord Chief Justice is the head of the judiciary. The relevant government minister is the Lord Chancellor, currently Jack Straw MP, the Minister for Justice.

Jack Straw claimed that the proposed addition was legislating unnecessarily as it followed that if the Lord Chief Justice had appointed a judge then he approved the request to suspend the coroner's investigation. He described the situation prior to the proposed addition as already being: "as clear as a pikestaff"^[3].

If one accepts the Minister's argument then this was not a vote on the question of if a Minister ought be given the power to suspend an inquest. Those disagreeing saw the additional condition as a necessary "additional safeguard and reassurance".^[4]

The main provisions of the Coroners and Justice Bill were to^[5]:

• Allow secret inquests although the Lord Chief Justice can veto requests for private inquests and decide who the judge is
• Prevent criminals from profiting from publications about their crimes
• Allow courts to grant anonymity to vulnerable or intimidated witnesses as long as this still ensured a fair trial

----

• [1] Dominic Grieve MP, 12 November 2009, House of Commons
• [2] Lords amendment 1B and Amendment paper containing amendment (a) to Lords amendment 1B
• [3] Jack Straw MP, Lord Chancellor, Minister for Justice, 12 November 2009, House of Commons
• [4] Dominic Grieve MP, 12 November 2009, House of Commons
• [5] Wikipedia entry, Retrieved on 2010-02-07

Debate in Parliament | Source |