Blog

  • Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Nokes on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential psychological effect on victims of domestic abuse who are representing themselves as litigants in person in the family court of being cross-examined by their alleged abuser.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The Government is committed to supporting victims of domestic violence and abuse.

    The Ministry of Justice is undertaking research to explore how the family judiciary are currently managing cases where unrepresented alleged perpetrators of abuse can cross-examine vulnerable witnesses in the family court, and to establish what, if any, additional provisions could be considered to support them in doing so. A report will be published in due course.

    The research did not aim to assess the psychological impact of any cross-examination on victims of domestic abuse. However, some of the findings relate to the considerations the judiciary make in managing such cases appropriately, and the report will outline options to further protect vulnerable witnesses in the family court. It was out of scope of this research to explore cases where an unrepresented litigant who is a victim of domestic abuse may have to cross-examine their alleged abuser.

    Family judges have a range of powers and training to manage difficult court room situations and to ensure they are handled sensitively for victims of domestic violence and other vulnerable witnesses. Judges can intervene to prevent inappropriate questions or have questions relayed. Practical protections, for example, protective screens, video links, separate waiting rooms and separate entrances are available where appropriate. It is for the judge involved, on the basis of the evidence, to determine how the framework will be applied in a particular case.

    The family courts take the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. The Child Arrangement Programme and Practice Direction 12J set out a strong and clear framework where domestic violence is alleged and all judges receive specific training on this framework.

  • Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Nokes on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that all victims of domestic abuse attending the family courts have access to special measures similar to those available in the criminal courts.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The Government is committed to supporting victims of domestic violence and abuse.

    The Ministry of Justice is undertaking research to explore how the family judiciary are currently managing cases where unrepresented alleged perpetrators of abuse can cross-examine vulnerable witnesses in the family court, and to establish what, if any, additional provisions could be considered to support them in doing so. A report will be published in due course.

    The research did not aim to assess the psychological impact of any cross-examination on victims of domestic abuse. However, some of the findings relate to the considerations the judiciary make in managing such cases appropriately, and the report will outline options to further protect vulnerable witnesses in the family court. It was out of scope of this research to explore cases where an unrepresented litigant who is a victim of domestic abuse may have to cross-examine their alleged abuser.

    Family judges have a range of powers and training to manage difficult court room situations and to ensure they are handled sensitively for victims of domestic violence and other vulnerable witnesses. Judges can intervene to prevent inappropriate questions or have questions relayed. Practical protections, for example, protective screens, video links, separate waiting rooms and separate entrances are available where appropriate. It is for the judge involved, on the basis of the evidence, to determine how the framework will be applied in a particular case.

    The family courts take the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. The Child Arrangement Programme and Practice Direction 12J set out a strong and clear framework where domestic violence is alleged and all judges receive specific training on this framework.

  • Margaret Ritchie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Margaret Ritchie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ritchie on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans his Department has for consultation with (a) civil society groups, (b) the devolved administrations and (c) Northern Ireland to inform its report for the third cycle of the Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review.

    Dominic Raab

    We have not yet been informed of the date of the third Universal Periodic Review of the UK.

  • Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Nokes on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many family courts have designated safe waiting rooms for vulnerable victims and witnesses.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The Government is committed to supporting victims of domestic violence and abuse.

    The Ministry of Justice is undertaking research to explore how the family judiciary are currently managing cases where unrepresented alleged perpetrators of abuse can cross-examine vulnerable witnesses in the family court, and to establish what, if any, additional provisions could be considered to support them in doing so. A report will be published in due course.

    The research did not aim to assess the psychological impact of any cross-examination on victims of domestic abuse. However, some of the findings relate to the considerations the judiciary make in managing such cases appropriately, and the report will outline options to further protect vulnerable witnesses in the family court. It was out of scope of this research to explore cases where an unrepresented litigant who is a victim of domestic abuse may have to cross-examine their alleged abuser.

    Family judges have a range of powers and training to manage difficult court room situations and to ensure they are handled sensitively for victims of domestic violence and other vulnerable witnesses. Judges can intervene to prevent inappropriate questions or have questions relayed. Practical protections, for example, protective screens, video links, separate waiting rooms and separate entrances are available where appropriate. It is for the judge involved, on the basis of the evidence, to determine how the framework will be applied in a particular case.

    The family courts take the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. The Child Arrangement Programme and Practice Direction 12J set out a strong and clear framework where domestic violence is alleged and all judges receive specific training on this framework.

  • Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Caroline Nokes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Nokes on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress his Department has made on ensuring that all judges and family court sittings in private family proceedings cases where there is evidence of domestic abuse adhere to Practice Direction 12J: Child Arrangements and Contact Order: Domestic Violence and Harm.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The Government is committed to supporting victims of domestic violence and abuse.

    The Ministry of Justice is undertaking research to explore how the family judiciary are currently managing cases where unrepresented alleged perpetrators of abuse can cross-examine vulnerable witnesses in the family court, and to establish what, if any, additional provisions could be considered to support them in doing so. A report will be published in due course.

    The research did not aim to assess the psychological impact of any cross-examination on victims of domestic abuse. However, some of the findings relate to the considerations the judiciary make in managing such cases appropriately, and the report will outline options to further protect vulnerable witnesses in the family court. It was out of scope of this research to explore cases where an unrepresented litigant who is a victim of domestic abuse may have to cross-examine their alleged abuser.

    Family judges have a range of powers and training to manage difficult court room situations and to ensure they are handled sensitively for victims of domestic violence and other vulnerable witnesses. Judges can intervene to prevent inappropriate questions or have questions relayed. Practical protections, for example, protective screens, video links, separate waiting rooms and separate entrances are available where appropriate. It is for the judge involved, on the basis of the evidence, to determine how the framework will be applied in a particular case.

    The family courts take the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. The Child Arrangement Programme and Practice Direction 12J set out a strong and clear framework where domestic violence is alleged and all judges receive specific training on this framework.

  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has conducted of the potential effect of the closure of 86 courts and tribunals in England and Wales on access to justice by people in low-income households.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    Before making any decision to close a court or tribunal, we considered carefully the effect of closures on all court and tribunal users.

    The court estate is underused and needs to be updated. Last year, nearly half of our courtrooms were used for less than half of their ordinary sitting time. The Government is committed to modernising the way justice is accessed and delivered, putting users at the heart of the system.

    To ensure that access to justice is maintained, we are committed to providing alternative ways for users to access our services, including the use of other civic buildings for video links or hearings.

    The consultation response is available online at www.gov.uk/moj.

    “

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department plans to take to ensure that proposed revisions to the sentencing guideline for guilty plea reductions do not lead to a culture of plea bargaining.

    Dominic Raab

    On 11 February the independent Sentencing Council launched a consultation on a new proposed guideline for reductions in sentence for a guilty plea. This is a consultation, and no decisions have been made. Accepting a plea is a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service. All decisions by the prosecution are made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many asylum claimants whose asylum claim has been refused but who cannot be legally deported because their destination country is deemed unsafe have been admitted to prison in each of the last five years.

    James Brokenshire

    We carefully consider all asylum claims on their individual merits and provide protection for those who need it, in accordance with our international obligations. No one who is at risk of serious harm in their country is expected to return there, but we do expect those who do not need our protection to return home voluntarily. Neither the Home Office nor the Ministry of Justice holds data on the number of failed asylum seekers who are admitted to prison as the information is not captured in that way.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of the comparative effect of changes to civil service pensions on prison officers who joined that scheme under Classic but have been switched to the Alpha scheme and colleagues with the same length of service who have not been switched.

    Andrew Selous

    Alpha is the new Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme, which now applies to the vast majority of Civil Servants (including prison officers). Only those who are close to retirement have been able to remain in previous schemes or to defer entry to the Alpha scheme. This has always been made transparent and is considered fair as this group of staff are likely to have already started to make plans for their retirements which would be unduly impacted by a change in arrangements at this stage. There are therefore no plans to make such an assessment.

  • Margaret Beckett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Margaret Beckett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Beckett on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will estimate the number of care proceedings involving children and families from countries in Eastern Europe in the latest period for which figures are available.

    Caroline Dinenage

    Information is not held centrally by the Ministry of Justice about the nationality (or ethnicity) of the children and families involved in family court proceedings in England and Wales.