Source · Select Committees · Justice Committee
Recommendation 19
19
Rejected
Ensure acquitted individuals receive resettlement support, accommodation assistance, and discharge grants.
Recommendation
It is simply wrong that those who are remanded to custody, potentially for long periods of time, and are then acquitted, have no entitlement to resettlement support. Although they may not fall technically within the responsibility of probation services, the Government must nevertheless find a way to ensure acquitted individuals are supported to return to the community in a way that is at least equivalent to those who are released having served a custodial sentence. As a minimum, they should be assisted in finding temporary accommodation following their release and be entitled to the same discharge grant as those who are sentenced and then released. The renegotiation of accommodation support contracts would appear to be a good opportunity to consider how similar support can be given to those who are acquitted. We would therefore like to see progress in relation to this matter by April 2023, the target date the Ministry gave us for the renegotiation of support contracts. This issue is now all the more acute because of the increase in time that defendants are spending on remand and the increased adverse consequences for them that accompany this. (Paragraph 111) 46 The role of adult custodial remand in the criminal justice system Alternatives to custodial remand
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly rejected the recommendation, explaining that comprehensive guidance on bail conditions already exists in the Adult Court Bench Book and that a new framework would risk complicating the process, without addressing resettlement support for acquitted individuals.
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
We reject this recommendation. There is already comprehensive guidance in the Adult Court Bench Book on bail conditions and the circumstances in which those conditions may be imposed. For example, a residence condition or reporting to a police station may be given if there is a risk of absconding; electronically monitored exclusion zones or curfews or non-contact with a witness condition if there is a risk of further offences or interference with witnesses; surety or security to ensure attendance at court. Any other condition may be imposed provided it addresses one of the risks under the Bail Act, is in proportion to the risk and can realistically be enforced. Given the wide range of potential conditions and how case specific they will be it is difficult to imagine a framework that would provide information not available in the Adult Court Bench Book that would not risk complicating the process for all parties. Monitoring compliance with bail conditions is not a matter for the judiciary, but rests with whoever has responsibility for the conditions that have been imposed. For example, where an electronically monitored curfew has been imposed, the electronic monitoring provider would monitor compliance with the curfew.