News

Coroner backed over media circus claims

The coroner hearing the inquest into the death of Princess Diana is doing a good job under difficult circumstances and is right to call MI6 officers to give evidence, says Finers Stephens Innocent media expert Mark Stephens. His comments follow stinging criticism piled on Lord Justice Scott Baker by peers and MPs, who accused the coroner of turning the inquest into a media circus, and abusing the British legal system.

Ten British intelligence officers have been requested to appear before the inquest following claims by Mohamed Al Fayed— whose son Dodi died in the crash which killed the princess—that MI6 was involved in the deaths. Denis MacShane, a former Foreign Office minister, said: “Al Fayed and his legal team are going too far. To put servants of the country, whose identities should be protected, into this farcical proceeding is threatening their individual security. This is not only a farce, it is a contemptible abuse of British law and a scandalous waste of public money.”

However, Stephens says, while many of the allegations Al Fayed has put forward could be regarded as far-fetched, others would consider that Scott Baker L J is doing a public service in attempting to determine whether the conspiracy theories have any merit in them.

He says: “If Scott Baker LJ had said ‘No I won’t let you explore that area’ he would be accused of a cover-up. He’s not running a circus, he’s doing a good job in difficult circumstances. It’s easy for MPs to take a pot-shot at Al Fayed or to try to curry favour with the Royal Family. But when someone makes allegation on oath you need to explore those allegations and debunk them within the arena that’s set up. “I think he’s right to call MI6 officers—he would be criticised if he didn’t. There has been a clear allegation that this was an MI6 operation so you have to bring the evidence. The coroner is charged by his coronial oath to investigate and bring evidence before the jury and that means all the evidence. He is saying he is not the arbitrator of fact, the jury is,” Stephens adds.

Best value tendering panned by solicitors

Plans to introduce best value tendering (BVT) for criminal legal aid have been condemned by the profession, with 67% of solicitors surveyed by the Law Society “strongly against” the proposals.

The society’s online survey of 361 legal aid practitioners shows only 11% are strongly in favour of Legal Services Commission (LSC) plans to introduce a best value bidding process for the right to provide criminal legal aid work. A resounding 85% of firms said they will not be in a position to bid at a later stage if unsuccessful in the first stage, while 71% of providers feel there should be a minimum contract price in any future BVT scheme.

Onerous terms were cited as the most popular factor (27%) which would dissuade providers from tendering in any BVT scheme, followed by the bureaucratic tendering process (25%) and the length of the contract (16%).

Richard Miller, Law Society legal aid manager, says: “The fact 85% said they would not bid for the contracts again when they come up for renewal if they failed first time around starkly demonstrates one of the major problems with the proposals. We have still seen no answer to the question how there can be adequate competition in any second round of bidding.” More than half (56%) of criminal legal aid firms responding undertook civil legal aid work, and many felt there would be an adverse impact on their civil legal aid work if they were unsuccessful with their criminal bids: 39% say they will cease civil legal aid work altogether and 22% said they would decrease it.

Miller adds: “The figures reveal the potential knock-on impact on civil and family supply from a lack of criminal legal aid work because the cost for firms of maintaining their legal aid systems for the civil work alone would be too great.” Legal Action Group director, Steve Hynes, wants the government to put BVT plans on hold for a year: “We are suggesting the impact of fixed fees and the cuts to the scope of criminal legal aid needs to be assessed before contemplating the introduction of BVT. While these measures have controlled the budget, the LSC and the government do not know if this has been at the cost of the long term economic viability of many firms.”

He says client choice and full national coverage of courts and police stations would be under threat if the market were to consolidate into a few providers in each area. “There is also the real risk of spiralling costs after the first round of contracts as cartels of successful bidders take a grip of the market,” he adds. (See this issue p 309.)