Secret Inquiries in the Coroners and Justice Act

The Liberal Democrats have consistently opposed secret inquiries in the Coroners and Justice Act

The whole purpose of an inquest is to uncover the truth about a person's death - and, particularly in cases of deaths at the hands of the state, to ensure public accountability. An inquest without a jury is not acceptable in cases concerning deaths at the hands of the state. The presence of a jury is vital to ensuring accountability. All the incarnations of the government's proposals on this issue have in common the desire to exclude the jury and replace it with a judge handpicked by the government. This mistrust of the public runs completely counter to the principles of a democratic society.

Liberal Democrats opposed provisions for secret inquests when they were first introduced in the Counter Terrorism Bill in 2008. Liberal Democrat-led opposition in the Lords led to these proposals being dropped.

But they were then resurrected, with few improvements, in the Coroners and Justice Bill this year. Liberal Democrats again opposed the measures, and following a rocky passage through the Commons the government announced they were dropping the proposals once again.

However, this was not the victory many at the time supposed. It was always the government's intention to replace secret inquests with secret inquiries - the option that has now passed into law. This is, if anything, even more insidious. Inquiries under the Inquiries Act are subject to even fewer constraints than secret inquests would have been: important elements of the process are under the government's control, and there are fewer safeguards as to the circumstances under which an investigation can be certified.

Liberal Democrats have therefore continued to be vocal in opposition to this. Liberal Democrats defeated the government in the Lords, successfully putting forward proposals to allow intercept evidence in inquests. This would have removed the government's key justification for a secret procedure: the impossibility of holding inquests in cases like that of Azelle Rodney, where intercept evidence is involved.

In the Commons, a further vote to throw out the secret inquiry provisions altogether was narrowly lost by a margin of just seven votes. Unfortunately, when the Bill then returned to the Lords, the Conservatives abandoned their opposition, leaving us unable to defeat the government's proposals. As a result, the measures are now law.

Rosie Sharpley states "I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues are profoundly frustrated by this turn of events and be assured that we will continue to press the government on this issue and seek legislative opportunities to push for the repeal of these dangerous provisions".