Search

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees. On title page: Returns to orders of the House of Commons dated 14 May 2013 (the Chairman of Ways and Means)

This report includes the work of both the Justice Committee and its predecessor, the Constitutional Affairs Committee, in 2007

This is the Committee's second annual report monitoring the Government's response to human rights judgments in the European Court of Human Rights. The Committee criticises the Government for its failure to respond to many of its recommendations in its previous report (17th report session 2006-07, HL 128/HC 728, ISBN 9780104011065). The Committee believes the Government should take a consistent and transparent approach across departments to the way in which it responds to declarations of incompatibility and judgments fro the European Court, with the Ministry of Justice co-ordinating the response to adverse judgments. This report also examines a number of issues arising from outstanding judgments: access to artificial insemination for prisoners and their partners; controlling membership of trade union; prisoners' voting rights; investigations into cases involving the use of lethal force; security of tenure for gypsies and travellers, and the corporal punishment of children.

work of the Committee In 2008-09 : Sixth report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal Minutes

Annual report For 2004 : First report of session 2004-05, report, together with appendices and formal Minutes

The depth and pace of EU integration has demonstrated the need for effective democratic parliamentary scrutiny and accountability of Government at Westminster. This is the first major inquiry into the European scrutiny system in the House of Commons for eight years. There is more that the Committee could do to look at the impact of new proposals. There should be a new requirement to appoint ’Reporters' to take the lead within Committees on EU issues, as well as a more coordinated approach to the Commission Work Programme. Whilst the system need not be scrapped as some have said, it must be enhanced. Many problems arise from the fact that new Members are appointed for each document. The Committee argues forcefully for a return to the permanent membership system, new powers and a change of name to reflect the Committees' core purpose: EU Document Debate Committees. The Committee also examined how EU business is taken on the floor of the House, and the procedures which apply to it. They set out a series of recommendations about the way debates are scheduled and conducted and put the case for a new session of ’EU Questions'. They also review working practices and the visibility of the House's scrutiny of the EU in the media. It concluded that now is the time to propose the introduction of a form of national veto over EU legislative proposals, and then to explore the mechanics of disapplication of parts of existing EU obligations, notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972

The House of Commons' Northern Ireland Affairs Committee says the administrative scheme of "comfort letters" sent to "on-the-runs" (OTRs) should never have taken place in the manner in which it was developed and run, and its existence has distorted the process of justice. The administrative scheme to deal with "on-the-runs" OTRs arose out of what Sinn Fâin saw as an anomaly left over from the Belfast Agreement. After the Agreement was signed, it became apparent that those who had voluntarily exiled themselves from the jurisdiction would not be covered by the terms of the early release scheme and would not be able to return to the UK without the risk of arrest. The administrative scheme devised by the Government allowed those individuals on the run to ask, through lists of names mainly submitted to the Northern Ireland Office and No. 10 Downing Street by Sinn Fâin, the Irish Government, and the NI Prison Service, whether they would be at risk of arrest should they return to the UK. The scheme was not subject to an overarching agreement with all of the political parties involved in the peace process. It is questionable whether the "on-the-runs" (OTR) scheme was lawful or not, but the Committee believe its existence distorted the legal process. The Committee accepts that there was a difficult peace process going on at the time, but believe that there still has to be transparency and accountability in government and in the legal process. The Committee also believe, and as has been accepted by some witnesses, including Tony Blair, former Secretaries of State and the Permanent Secretary in the NIO, that it was badly run and, if it existed at all, should have been formalised within the various agencies involved with clear lines of reporting and accountabilities. This should have included full avenues of dialogue between police forces and other agencies involved to ensure that all steps were taken to send out accurate information at the end of the process and discussed publicly.

Appendices accompany vols. 64, 67-71.