Letters: The DPP made the right decision about Janner's trial

The following letters appear in the 30 June edition of The Independent

The Director of Public Prosecutions is being heavily criticised for her decision not to prosecute Lord Janner. The independent reviewer has reversed the decision and given the go-ahead for a prosecution.

Yet on the law as it stands, her decision was clearly right. Everyone involved agrees that Lord Janner, because of his dementia, is unfit to plead. They also all agree he no longer constitutes a danger. So the effect of prosecution is that a judge will inevitably find him unfit to plead. Then there will be a trial of the facts. There will be no defence case, therefore no meaningful cross-examination. The facts will be found proved. Lord Janner will not be found guilty, nor will he be locked up, as he is no longer a danger.

What is the public interest in that? Public interest does not mean some members of the public may be interested. It means benefit to the public at large. It is said that the unfortunate alleged victims get a chance to tell their story in open court. If that is a benefit to the public at large then it has never been considered so in the past. If it has now become a benefit then Parliament had better enact a procedure so all victims get a chance. What about the victims of dead perpetrators (Jimmy Savile victims spring to mind), or perpetrators who cannot be found; why can’t these victims be allowed the alleged benefit of an open court recital of their case?

However, what does need investigation (which this prosecution will do nothing towards) is why there was no prosecution when the complaints were first made and the accused was plainly fit to stand trial.

Tony Somers
London SW5

Greek prosperity is in everybody’s interest

Few economists would disagree with Sean O’Grady’s view that the EU’s experiment with a common currency is doomed to failure (29 June). Many, however, would take issue with his belief that “The EU should not cave in again to Greece.” This, surely, is to confuse what is morally and politically desirable with what is economically feasible.

For an economy to grow it has to generate and/or borrow a surplus to invest in new capacity. Under the terms offered by the troika, there would be precious little left to invest after the creditors are repaid, condemning the Greek populace to years of stagnation and unemployment.

Much better would be to take a haircut on some of the outstanding debt and reschedule payments so that more of the funds generated are put to productive uses. Terms should specify the ways in which the Greek economy might be made more competitive. Thus internal market failures should be addressed, institutions reformed, an equitable and effective tax system put in place, and support provided for a major overhaul of infrastructure.

A more productive economy would benefit not only the hard-pressed Greeks but also their creditors, who, at the end of the day, might even get most of their money back. As for the future of the euro, that is another matter.

Dr S R H Jones
Malvern

Sean O’Grady is correct when he says “the Greeks are mainly responsible for the debts they ran up,” but the historical perspective is important in trying to understand these noble, impetuous, and sometimes exasperating people.

I taught in a small country town in the early 1970s. The common people lived simply, meat was a luxury, there were no cars or TVs. True, the Greek government massaged the figures when they applied for membership, but the EU snapped them up, thus establishing a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean.

When they received all the EU money, they were like children let loose in a toy shop, and now they’re paying for it (or in this case, not paying for it).

Greeks have long and bitter memories of foreign invaders. Unfortunately the Germans were the latest. Certain governments should consider their role in recent dealings with the Greeks before making decisions over which the common people have little influence, though they have to suffer grinding austerity.

Richard Guscott
Liskeard, Cornwall

There is no prospect of Greece paying its debts. There has to be a procedure within the eurozone by which nations can become bankrupt. The debtor’s prison was never a good solution.

Peter Saundby
Llangynidr, Crickhowell

You report David Cameron’s opinion that if Greece votes No in the referendum, Greece will have to leave the euro. As prime minister of a state that has stood aloof from the euro and the EU, Cameron is reducing himself to the status of commentator.

Martin London
Henllan, Denbighshire

Paying for the Charity Commission

Paula Sussex says she has never felt that the Charity Commission’s independence has been compromised (“Charities may have to pay fees to cover their own regulation”, 25 June). In 2006 appointments to the board were overhauled and are now made by a minister from a wide pool of applicants, rather than a small number of civil servants and lawyers. Both those who have held the chair under this process have been subject to frequent accusations of political bias as appointees of the government of the day. These don’t have to be correct to be damaging.

It is in charities’ interests to have an effective regulator, so we must be prepared to discuss whether charities need to contribute to its funding themselves. But charities would not want to simply subsidise the current arrangement. Charging would need to go hand-in-hand with reforms to the commission’s governance so that it is both independent of government and seen to be so.

Sir Stuart Etherington
Chief Executive
National Council for Voluntary Organisations, London N1

Your article on the regulation of charities raises again the prospect, dear to William Shawcross’s heart, that charities might be compelled to pay for their own regulation. The Charity Commission has suffered massive cuts, it is true, and is probably not capable of performing its role adequately as a result. But this is not the right answer.

I question how much weight should be given to a poll in which around three quarters of respondents admitted to knowing little or nothing about the regulation of charities, and more than half had never heard of the Charity Commission. That half may have confused charity regulation with the regulation of fundraising, which is not the role of the Charity Commission. Fundraising is regulated separately by the Fundraising Standards Board for which more than 2000 charities already pay a fee.

A smaller group of charities involved in street fundraising also pay a fee to a second regulator, the Public Fundraising Regulatory Association.

How many respondents would have voted for charities to pay an additional fee for the services offered by the Commission if they had known that this would be a second, sometimes a third, slice off their donation to pay for regulation? I rather think that had this been explained, there might have been a different response.

Andrew Scadding
Bradnop, Staffordshire

Terror attacks threaten us all

My heart goes out to the families of the victims of the terror attacks in Tunisia, Kuwait, France and elsewhere. The terrorists represent themselves only, not Muslims or Islam, which prohibits such acts. Let’s not forget that most of their victims are Muslims.

They are a threat to us all, and we should not allow them to divide us. Foreign policy and interventions which strengthen extremists and weaken moderates should be changed. We should salute the brave Muslims who turned themselves into human shields to protect western tourists.

Mohammed Samaana
Belfast

Many Shiites have been killed in mosque attacks recently in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The Bahrain and Saudi governments have attacked their Shiite citizens and refuse to make their mosques safe.

The West has contributed to this mess by destabilising countries and not supporting the democrats seeking change. We must do something positive to protect innocent people in the Gulf being slaughtered because of their religion.

The EU talks about Greece while the Middle East disintegrates, and the US and UK support bombing Yemen.

Janet Salmon
Richmond, Twickenham

Europe and America united and divided

Eurosceptics often point out how different our European neighbours are to us as proof that the EU is doomed to failure. In the US, the most successful political union in the world, there is soul-searching about the void between the rest of the country and the old South following the horrific shooting in Charleston. I know which difference I prefer.

David Clarke
Edinburgh