Recommendations & Conclusions
6 items
13
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
The Ministry of Justice has undertaken to write to this Committee whenever it introduces a statutory instrument which may be of interest to this Committee. During the pandemic, we have corresponded with the Lord Chancellor over a number 34 Covid-19 and the criminal law of statutory instruments, such as those …
Read more
The Ministry of Justice has undertaken to write to this Committee whenever it introduces a statutory instrument which may be of interest to this Committee. During the pandemic, we have corresponded with the Lord Chancellor over a number 34 Covid-19 and the criminal law of statutory instruments, such as those for example regarding custody time limits and the stay on possession proceedings. The Ministry of Justice’s commitment to ensure that this Committee is informed of significant changes to the justice system through statutory instruments is very important for our work. It would represent good practice if all other government departments also undertook to keep their corresponding select committees informed of significant changes to the law made by statutory instrument.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation for all departments to proactively inform select committees of significant statutory instruments. It states that all SIs are publicly available and managing information flow is a matter for individual departments and committees to determine.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
20
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
Fixed penalty notices have an established a role in our legal system, for example for road traffic offences, but the context of new covid-19 offences is different from many of these offences and curtailed freedoms considered fundamental in a democratic society. We recognise that fixed penalty notices played a valuable …
Read more
Fixed penalty notices have an established a role in our legal system, for example for road traffic offences, but the context of new covid-19 offences is different from many of these offences and curtailed freedoms considered fundamental in a democratic society. We recognise that fixed penalty notices played a valuable role in policing the pandemic. However, in principle, when offences in question are complex, difficult to apply and give rise to significant sanctions, it should ordinarily be the responsibility of a court, rather than an official to determine liability. Any future review considering alternative approaches should give due weight to this.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explains its rationale for using Fixed Penalty Notices during the pandemic, highlighting the due diligence process undertaken to ensure offences and penalties were proportionate and effective in reducing transmission.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
21
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
A £10,000 fine for a criminal offence is a penalty so large that only a court should issue it. When a court issues a fine, it takes into account the financial circumstances of an individual; this is not the case with fixed penalty notices.
Government response AI summary
The government justifies the £10,000 FPNs by explaining their role as a deterrent for egregious breaches and describes the existing discretionary review and challenge processes available to recipients.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
32
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
However, given the relatively small number of covid-19 cases and their public importance, we do not think that all covid-19 offences in the regulations should necessarily have been specified to allow the procedure to be used. The use of the single justice procedure to deal with covid-19 offences has been …
Read more
However, given the relatively small number of covid-19 cases and their public importance, we do not think that all covid-19 offences in the regulations should necessarily have been specified to allow the procedure to be used. The use of the single justice procedure to deal with covid-19 offences has been problematic in the wider context of public uncertainty over what was prohibited and what was allowed, Covid-19 and the criminal law 37 caused by the fast-changing nature of the covid-19 regulations. We also appreciate concerns expressed to us about the transparency of the single justice procedure. In a pandemic it is also important for the integrity of offences that justice is seen to be delivered in line with the principles of the rule of law.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implicit recommendation for a formal review of the Single Justice Procedure for COVID-19 cases, stating that safeguards are in place, the procedure is continually being improved, and there is no evidence of higher error rates.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
33
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
A lesson learnt from the pandemic is that the Ministry of Justice should review the transparency of the single justice procedure and consider how the process could be made more open and accessible to the media and the public.
Government response AI summary
The Ministry of Justice does not agree with the recommendation to review the transparency of the single justice procedure, stating current arrangements, including the HMCTS Media Protocol and online lists, already provide sufficient transparency.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
34
Recommendation
4th Report - Covid-19 and the criminal …
Rejected
The Government should also conduct a review of the use of the single justice procedure in covid-19 cases. The review should consider the relative complexity of different covid-19 cases and whether it was appropriate for more complex cases to be specified to allow use of the single justice procedure. This …
Read more
The Government should also conduct a review of the use of the single justice procedure in covid-19 cases. The review should consider the relative complexity of different covid-19 cases and whether it was appropriate for more complex cases to be specified to allow use of the single justice procedure. This could be incorporated as part of our recommended review by the UK Health Security Agency into the role of the criminal justice system in protecting public health during pandemics. (Paragraph 92) 38 Covid-19 and the criminal law
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation for a formal review of the Single Justice Procedure in COVID-19 cases, stating that safeguards are in place and the Ministry of Justice is continuously reviewing and improving the general SJP process.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice