• Home /
• Statewatch Database /
• Right to silence

Right to silence

01 May 1994

Three leading barristers have said that removal of the right to silence raises a serious issue of compatibility with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial). The opinion of QCs Peter Duffy, Richard Plender and Roy Amlot was commissioned by Liberty, which plans to challenge the law at Strasbourg. Lord Runciman, who chaired the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice, said that the proposals would:

"put into reverse the main thrust of PACE ... If you think the problem of police malpractice has been eliminated you are not living in the real world. These measures will expose the frightened and confused suspect to undue and improper pressure that will risk wrongful convictions."

Lord Alexander, chair of Justice, the all-party law reform group, said the proposals were "a charter for unlimited police interrogation."

And out of a dossier of 50 miscarriage of justice cases compiled by Chris Mullin MP from the hundreds of cases sent to him, many were "based on statements extracted in police custody or based on admissions allegedly overheard by cell-mates, a feature of controversial convictions that has not previously had the attention it deserves." The dossier includes cases such as the Bridgwater 4, Satpal Ram (sentenced to life imprisonment in 1986 for a stabbing, he claims to have acted in self-defence after being "glassed" by a racist); and Gerard Magee (convicted on confession evidence obtained after 30 hours of interviews and beatings at Castlereagh, and sentenced to 20 years for conspiracy to cause explosions).

Guardian 11 & 26.4.94; Independent 5 15 18 19.4.94; ACPO Standing Sub-Committee on sled defence arrest and restraint, 5.1.94; Independent on Sunday 10.4.94; Guardian 7.5.94.