Professor Robert Black, an expert in Scots law, has written an amendment to the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 which would allow the judges to make a judgment after hearing just one part of the appeal.
Alex Neil, SNP MSP for Central Scotland, has offered to table the amendment and speak to Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, about the issue. (...)
The appeal, due to begin on April 27, is expected to last for more than a year and because of its complexity will be broken down into separate subject chapters with a gap of some four weeks between each.
Mr Black hopes the amendment would mean judges could release Megrahi after just two or three "chapters" rather than waiting until the summer of 2010 for a decision.
Mr Black said: "If the court is satisfied there has been a miscarriage of justice after just two chapters, why not decide it there and then?
"As far as I am aware this is the first time in Scotland an appeal has been broken down like this into such specific, separate chapters. Once they have heard enough, I want them to be able to say they quash the conviction and release Megrahi to allow him to die as a free man.
"To ensure the rest of the evidence cannot then be swept under the carpet, I would want them to hear the rest of the chapters in open court afterwards."
[From an article by Lucy Adams in today's edition of The Herald. The full article can be read here.]
The complete text of the proposed amendment, along with an explanatory memorandum is as follows:
New section to be inserted into Part VIII of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (c 46)
Staged Appeals
(1) Where an appeal is heard in stages with specific grounds of appeal allocated to each stage and there is an interval of more than four weeks between the end of any stage and the beginning of the next, the court, if the appellant at or before the end of any stage requests, shall
(a) give judgement on such grounds of appeal as have been argued, and
(b) exercise such of its powers under section 118(1) as it deems appropriate
before the commencement of argument on the grounds of appeal allocated to the succeeding stage.
(2) Where the interval between the end of any stage and the beginning of the next is less than four weeks, the court may, if it thinks fit and the appellant requests, exercise the powers conferred in subsection (1).
(3) Where the court exercises the power conferred in subsection (1) or subsection (2), it shall continue to hear and shall give judgement upon the grounds of appeal allocated to the remaining stages of the appeal unless the appellant intimates his abandonment thereof.
(4) Where, in respect of each individual stage, the court has disposed of the grounds of appeal allocated thereto by affirming the verdict of the trial court, the court shall, at the conclusion of the appeal, consider whether, having regard to the whole grounds of appeal, a miscarriage of justice occurred in the proceedings in which the appellant was convicted.
(5) This section shall apply to appeals already before the court.
Explanatory Memorandum
1. In criminal appeals it is the normal practice for all of the grounds of appeal to be argued at a single diet extending over as many days as are required for the submissions of the appellant and the Crown to be heard. Judgement is then delivered by the Appeal Court, either immediately or after taking time -- whether days or weeks -- to consider. If an adjournment is for any reason required before the arguments are concluded, it is normally short and, on recommencement of the hearing, the arguments resume where they had left off.
2. In long and complex criminal appeals, it is competent for the Appeal Court to order that the appeal be heard in sections or stages, with specific grounds of appeal allocated to each individual stage, and with an interval of weeks or months between those stages. This has been done in relation to Abdelbaset Megrahi’s current appeal. The purpose of this amendment of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (c 46) is to secure that the Appeal Court has power in such cases to deliver judgement at the end of each individual stage on the grounds of appeal argued in the course of that stage.
3. Subsection (1) provides that where there is an interval of more than four weeks between the end of one stage and the beginning of the next, the Appeal Court must give judgement on the grounds of appeal argued in the first stage before the second stage commences, if the appellant has made a request to that effect at or before the end of the first stage. Subsection (2) provides that where the interval is less than four weeks, the Appeal Court may at its discretion give judgement on those grounds of appeal where the appellant has so requested.
4. Subsection (3) provides that the Appeal Court shall continue to hear the remaining stages of the appeal even if the court has delivered judgement quashing the appellant’s conviction after the conclusion of a prior stage. This is subject to the power of the appellant to abandon the grounds of appeal allocated to all or any of the remaining stages.
5. Subsection (4) provides that where the Appeal Court has given judgement at the end of each stage rejecting all of the grounds of appeal allocated to that stage, the court must nevertheless at the end of the final stage consider whether, having regard to the cumulative effect of the submissions on all of the grounds of appeal, a miscarriage of justice occurred in the proceedings out of which the appeal arose.
6. Subsection (5) provides that the powers conferred shall apply to appeals which have already been lodged in court at the date of passing of the section.
[Briefing note: It is rumoured that the various stages in Abdelbaset Megrahi’s current appeal, which is scheduled to begin on 28 April 2009, may not be concluded until well into 2010. Mr Megrahi is terminally ill with incurable prostate cancer. The purpose of this piece of law reform is to make it possible for his conviction to be quashed without his having to wait until after all the separate stages of his appeal have been concluded for the court to deliver judgement. This will maximise his chances of seeing his name cleared before he succumbs to his disease.]
No comments:
Post a Comment