With a number of large pieces of legislation on this week’s agenda, the States Assembly has sat until 9 pm on each of the previous nights, with several long days of debate still likely as Members try to complete their business before the Assembly dissolves ahead of the election in May.
Politicians spent the majority of yesterday debating an overhaul of the Island’s sexual offences law, the most controversial topic being whether to force certain offences to be tried by a panel of Jurats rather than a jury.
And having already debated changes to the way ministerial government is run, Members last night began debating whether to set up a committee of inquiry into the RNLI lifeboat dispute.
Under the changes to the sexual offences law, more offences are to be classed as rape and maximum sentences for sexual offences will be increased. The law also for the first time sets out a clear definition of consent.
At present, rape is defined as penile penetration of the vagina. The proposals, lodged by Home Affairs Minister Kristina Moore, make penetration of any kind without consent an act of rape and also, for the first time, mean men can be classed as victims of rape. The changes will formally come into effect by the end of this year.
However, an amendment from the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel had proposed that certain crimes including non-consensual offences, offences by adults against children aged 12 or younger and offences by adults against children aged 13 to 15 be tried by Jurats. The amendment, which was supported by Home Affairs Minister Kristina Moore, was rejected by 29 votes to 14 but Members went on to approve the other changes to the Sexual Offences Law.
Members spent hours arguing about whether a defendant should have the right to request to be tried by a jury of their peers or whether sexual offences would be better tried by a panel of Jurats.
Several Members criticised the panel for bringing such a major change just two weeks before the debate, suggesting that the panel had ‘rushed’ the proposition and had not consulted widely enough on the change.
The panel brought the amendment following a submission from charity Jersey Action Against Rape.
Deputy Tracey Vallois, who chaired the panel, said: ‘Please don’t think this is us wanting trial by Jurats in order to get more conviction rates – because it is not.
‘There are biases that exist and having trial by Jurat does not mean it is an unfair trial. They are tried already [by Jurats] in complex fraud cases.’
In a letter to all Members, the Assembly had been urged to reject the amendment by the Law Society.
Neville Benbow, chief executive of the Law Society, said the move would have removed the defendant’s fundamental right to a trial by jury.
During the debate Senator Sir Philip Bailhache – a former Bailiff – said: ‘The panel accepted the views of one group. The solutions the group suggested are not, in my view, appropriate and certainly should be considered more carefully by the panel and by the minister as well.’
Deputy Richard Renouf added that while the submission from JAAR was ‘valuable evidence’, the panel had not done enough to consult on whether the change was necessary, while Senator Philip Ozouf said that such an important piece of primary legislation needed more than two weeks to be considered by Members.
The sitting could continue into next week.
