Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

RUC chief wants tougher laws: Annesley says criminal process is heavily loaded in favour of the accused

David McKittrick
Thursday 27 May 1993 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

SIR HUGH Annesley, Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, yesterday called for a battery of new laws in Northern Ireland, arguing that the criminal process was heavily loaded in favour of the accused, writes David McKittrick.

Setting out a shopping list of seven items designed, in his terms, to redress the balance, he said the proposals were already being considered at a high level within the Government.

Sir Hugh, whose ideas were opposed by nationalist and civil liberties sources, said the current state of the law meant that a large number of people who should have been convicted of criminal offences were 'wandering free around Northern Ireland'.

Outlining his proposals at a Belfast press conference, Sir Hugh called for an end to the right to silence for people being questioned about crime. He believed that, in carefully defined circumstances, a refusal to answer questions should be an offence. He wanted accomplice evidence to be more readily admissible in court, and said courts should be told of previous terrorist convictions.

He also proposed that the burden of proof, in defined circumstances, should shift from the prosecution to the accused. Evidence of an intelligence nature, including telephone taps, should be admissible in defined circumstances, and there should be significant revision of the discovery process.

The ideas were criticised. Seamus Mallon MP, justice spokesman for the Social Democratic and Labour Party, described Sir Hugh's demands as an alarming and frightening litany of panic proposals which pointed to an inability to address the real security problems. Sinn Fein said such measures would overturn fundamental legal principles and 'bring in internment by the back door'.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in