To ask the Minister of Justice to outline the impact that late changes in defendant pleas, from not guilty to guilty, are having on all those involved in the justice system.

Mrs Long

A late guilty plea can cause particular challenges for victims, witnesses and the justice system. Victims and witnesses will have experienced the considerable stress of anticipating and preparing themselves for a court trial that does not proceed or does not proceed to its conclusion because of a late change of plea. Seeing sentences reduced following a guilty plea can also lead to a sense of injustice and loss of confidence in the court system. For the justice system, which will have seen a lot of police, prosecution and court time taken up by investigation, case preparation and court scheduling, additional costs will be incurred that could have been avoided had an earlier guilty plea been entered. One of my key aims as Minister of Justice is to drive consistent improvement in the Northern Ireland justice system. With that aim in mind, I have recently published a consultation to seek views on the way in which the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland deals with reductions in sentence length when a plea of guilty is entered in order to hear a range of views from the public and stakeholders on what is a critical issue.

Mrs Long

The consultation that I referred to will close on 11 July, and, after that, the Department will carefully consider all of the responses. It would not be appropriate to predetermine the potential policy solutions that may be introduced until the responses to the consultation have been considered, and it should not be assumed that the consultation will automatically result in decisions to change legislation. However, it is fair to say that I am open to doing so. The timing of the consultation has been chosen so that, should change be required and should the Assembly and the Executive be minded, there may be an opportunity to progress this as part of the sentencing Bill that is due for introduction in the autumn. That, as you will appreciate, is a challenging timetable, but, with the assistance of the Executive and with the Committee's support, it is entirely achievable.

Mr O'Toole

Someone who changed their plea from not guilty to guilty was, of course, Mr Winston, aka Winkie, Irvine. Public confidence in the justice system has been damaged by the reduced tariff given to Mr Irvine after letters from, apparently, the great and the good on:

Minister, what actions will you specifically be taking? First, do you agree that that has damaged confidence in the justice system? What specific actions will you take to review the sentencing rules to improve public confidence after those events?

Mr Speaker

I note, Minister, something that you brought up last time about Members asking you for your opinions. It continues to happen today, but I will leave that in your hands.

Mrs Long

As the Speaker knows, I am full of opinions, but I am not always willing to share them in this setting. Members will be aware that sentencing decisions are determined by the independent judiciary and are based on individual circumstances for each case. The relevant sentencing guidance is available, and the sentence maxima for the offence in question were specified in legislation. The statement issued by the Public Prosecution Service set out the issues around exceptional derogation from that, so all of that is in line with how the courts operate. I do not direct how sentencing is done, only what the maxima are at certain points in legislation. More widely, it is wholly inappropriate for Members to ask me to comment on sentences in individual cases. To do so is to invite me to interfere in due process, and that is an egregious breach of the firewalls that exist between the political and judicial spheres. Where a sentence is considered unduly lenient, the Director of Public Prosecutions can refer an eligible case to the Court of Appeal for consideration within 28 days. As the public prosecutor has indicated that they are considering that, this case remains sub judice. Therefore, I do not intend to comment further.

Mr Beattie

Minister, I have already completed the consultation on sentence reduction for guilty pleas. Can the Minister outline the benefit of a late guilty plea receiving up to a 25% reduction in a sentence?

Mrs Long

It is not for me to set that out; that was a judgement made in the courts in a challenge that was taken on the difference between an early and a late guilty plea. Initially, the range available to the judiciary was much greater, starting at 33% for what was considered an early guilty plea and going down to zero if it was felt that it was sufficiently late that it did not merit consideration. That was challenged, and now the courts have said that 25% is around the minimum established. From my perspective, it is not about whether I think that that is the appropriate level; my issue is about how transparent, open and credible that system is. Therefore, for me, it is about suggesting and testing the water through consultation on whether, for example, a clear sliding scale against when guilty pleas are entered should be made so that it is clear what the importance of the guilty plea will be and how that will factor in. It also has to be said that it is not only about early and late guilty pleas; it is also about the definition of "early". What is early for the court may not be early for the police or the victim or the public prosecutor or the court system. It may be the first opportunity that somebody has had to plead in open court at the start of the trial, but it may not be the first opportunity that they have had to plead guilty and save a lot of people a lot of work and time.