High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
The Coroners and Justice Bill:Investigating Deaths of PeopleDetained by the State
BRIEFING PAPER CALLING FOR AMENDMENT TO S.7 OFTHE BILL
Drafted by Steven Allen
12
th
May 2008
The Coroners and Justice Bill: Investigating the Deaths of People Detained by the State
1 of 6
Background
1.
On 14
th
January 2009 the Coroners and Justice Bill was introduced by Jack StrawMP into the House of Commons. It was introduced into the House of Lords by LordBach on 25
th
March 2009.
2.
The intention of the Bill, drafted by the Ministry of Justice, is to reform thecoroners system, aiming to deliver '
more effective, responsive and transparent justice... for victims, witnesses, bereaved families and the wider public.
'
3.
The coroners court is one of the oldest courts in Britain, with a history going backalmost 1,000 years. Its key position within the British legal system reflects itsimportance within the British constitution.
4.
This briefing has been drafted by Steven Allen.
Steven is the son of Sandra JeanAllen who died on 2
nd
October 2006 whilst detained under the powers of s.3 of the Mental Health Act 1984 at the Highgate Mental Health Centre in NorthLondon
.
5.
The coroner who investigated Mrs. Allen’s death was Dr. Andrew Reid, HM Coronerfor Inner North London.
Although the family brought substantial evidence of systemic failures which resulted in Mrs. Allen’s death, the coroner refused tocall a jury to hear the case
. This decision is now subject to Judicial Reviewproceedings which have reached the Court of Appeal.
6.
Investigating deaths – the current domestic legal position
7.
Coroners operate within districts around England and Wales under the powers of the Coroners Act 1988. Their key responsibility includes
ordering and presidingover inquests into deaths.
8.
Where an inquest has been ordered, the remit of this is to ascertain “
by whatmeans
” the deceased came to their death. The coroner is bound to hold a ‘fulland fearless inquiry’ into the “
cause and circumstances
” which contributed tothe death.
9.
If the coroner believes that the death occurred in a prison,
police station (or withthe involvement of a police officer),
or due to a notifiable accident, poisoning ordisease,
then the inquest must be
heard before a jury
.
10.
Furthermore, if the death “
occurred in circumstances the continuance orpossible recurrence of which is prejudicial to the health or safety of the public
1
Circumstances in which a coroner must open an inquest include where the death of a person wasviolent or unnatural, where the cause of death is unknown, or where the deceased died in custody –Coroner's Act 1988, s.8.
2
See
Jamieson
[1995] QB 1
3
Coroners Act 1988, s.8(3)(a)
4
Coroners Act 1988, s.8(3)(b)
5
Coroners Act 1988, s.8(3)(c)
The Coroners and Justice Bill: Investigating the Deaths of People Detained by the State
2 of 6
or any section of the public
”
then the coroner must also call a jury.
11.
Where a coroner has reason to believe that the death was preventable, they canmake recommendations to any relevant bodies under Rule 43 of the CoronersRules 1984 (as amended by the Coroners Amendment Rules 2008) to
preventfuture deaths
occurring from similar circumstances.
Calling juries where the death occurs in state detention – the currentposition
12.
‘
Detention’
is distinct from ‘imprisonment’ or ‘custody’. The meaning of theword ‘detention’ is broader and concerns those who are detained due to mentalillness under the civil sections of the Mental Health Act 1984
as well as thosedetained awaiting deportation under the Immigration Act 1971.
These are bothforms of civil detention
.13.The Coroners Act 1984 does not make specific provision for inquests into thedeaths of people held in civil detention to be heard before jury.
14.
However, jurisprudence has developed under the European Convention on HumanRights, as well as under the Human Rights Act 1998 confirming that there is
noreason to treat deaths in state detention any differently to those which occurin custody
.
15.
Article 2
of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that:
“Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionallysave in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.”
16.
It has been recognised, however, that where a death has occurred, and where thestate may have been implicated,
a procedural duty arises for the state to fullyinvestigate the circumstances of the death
.
This is a procedural dutyassociated with Article 2.
17.
The current position, however, is that
coroners are still not obliged to call juriesin cases concerning deaths that occur in state detention
, often choosing tonarrowly interpret s.8 of the Coroners Act 1988.
The case for juries to be called in all cases where a death occurs incustody or state detention
6
Coroners Act 1988, s.8(3)(d)
7
Mental Health Act 1984, ss.2, 3, 4, 5(2) and 5(4)
8
Immigration Act 1971, Schedule 2 para.16(2) as amended by Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, s.140.
9
For example, see
R (on the application of Helen Takoushis) v (1) HM Coroner for Inner North London,(2) Guys and St. Thomas’s NHS Trust and (3) The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police
[2005] EWCACiv 1440;
Savage v. South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent) and MIND (Intervener)
[2007] EWCA Civ 1375;
10
R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Amin
[2003] UKHL 51
11
See also
R (on the application of Middleton) v West Somerset Coroner
[2004] UKHL 10
The Coroners and Justice Bill: Investigating the Deaths of People Detained by the State
3 of 6
Add a Comment