Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mrs Ciara Ferguson on 2 June 2026.

MLA

Mrs Ciara Ferguson

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

2 June 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5584940

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the fact that the Justice Bill includes a provision to finally place the temporary measures under the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Extension of Provisions Relating to Live Links for Courts and Tribunals) (No.2) Order 2025 on a permanent footing. That relates to the use of videoconferencing technology or live links in courts, tribunals and police custody functions relating to criminal and civil proceedings where the judiciary decide that a person's participation in proceedings remotely would be in the interest of justice as per schedule 27 to the 2020 Act, assessed on a case-by-case basis. The Human Rights Commission emphasised that due regard must be given to the protection of article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair trial. The commission acknowledged that it can assist vulnerable witnesses, those who cannot travel for bail applications or if difficulties arise in producing someone in person due to serious illness but, importantly, should not be used for efficiency in order to save resources. Importantly, the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime identified that utilising videoconferencing technology has a range of benefits, including reducing the impact on vulnerable people; allowing children and victims of domestic violence, for example, to give evidence in child friendly or neutral, safe environments; and reducing risks of unplanned encounters with defendants. Sinn Féin has reflected on the EU victims' rights directive and the EU interpretative directive on PACE code C alongside the Victim Charter on the importance of safeguards for the rights of all victims, including persons suspected of a crime. We have given additional consideration to specific challenges for those who do not speak the language of the criminal proceedings or have other intellectual or communication impairments that may affect their ability to communicate effectively via the live links. Sinn Féin's amendment Nos 49 to 51 reflect the significance of that area in the Bill. That applies to the context of the explanation by a custody officer to a detainee of the nature of the live link arrangement and their rights but also in the context of the custody record relating to the arrested person. We have also reflected the importance of recording any issues or interruptions that arise during the live link arrangement. Whilst we appreciate the well-intentioned amendment from the DUP to review the use of live links in court and tribunal settings, that information is currently monitored and recorded by court staff. It would be more informative to consider how the data already being captured is complying with the non-diminution commitment in the Bill and to hear the Minister's view on whether that technology is fully compatible with the rights of vulnerable people.

Although court administration is handled internally for audit purposes, Criminal Justice Inspection has a role to play in examining, for example, to what extent case progression officers ensure the availability of suitable technology and interpreter facilities. Equally, work by Victim Support is under way to share client feedback to reflect whether remote evidence centres are working in practice. The Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime indicated that the civilian remote evidence group had assured her in 2022 that it planned to discuss the evaluation report on the Foyle SightLink pilot. Although SightLink has been replaced by the justice video platform, perhaps more work remains to be done to strengthen public debates about internal reviews of technology in practice. When it comes to police custody settings, Criminal Justice Inspection carries out periodic statutory inspections of police custody suites. That work includes investigating and evaluating how custody procedures and technology are managed in the treatment of detainees. Importantly, CJINI is empowered to publish formal recommendations requiring the PSNI to make operational and systematic improvements to safeguard compliance with human rights and legal standards. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge at this point that CJINI and the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority have raised issues about the lack of implementation by the PSNI of its strategic and operational recommendations, such as on the need for a "consistent, quality health service model" across custody suites to ensure that a person has:

"timely and appropriate care, regardless of their location."

I have significant concern that looked-after children — children in the care of the state — are disproportionately represented in custody and are more likely to be detained owing to their inability to access timely social work support, to go back to their children's home or to find suitable alternative accommodation. I note that in the context of the growing population of looked-after children and the increasing complexity of today's society. Although we did not table amendments for amendments' sake, in recognising that there are systemic accommodation shortages, we could not ignore the fact that, under the Children Order 1995, health and social care trusts have a strict legal duty to safeguard children and to promote adequate accommodation for them. We have, however, heard stories about scores of children, including one about a child with severe learning disabilities who was forced to stay in a juvenile justice facility for three months after having been granted bail and a judge having ordered their release. We have also heard stories about children being placed in hostels, hotels and B&Bs, which are wholly unsuitable to meet their needs or to safeguard them, given their vulnerability. Sinn Féin believes that the Minister and the Department, in conjunction with the Department of Health, have an urgent responsibility to place a major focus on that area. Significant reform is needed to ensure that we do not, inadvertently or otherwise, criminalise or unfairly detain vulnerable young people simply because of a lack of proper care infrastructure. We have a duty to uphold their rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). As I said in my opening remarks, we have examined PACE code C, and I appreciate that it dictates the strict legal requirements that must be followed regarding the detention, treatment and questioning of suspects in custody, including on receiving legal advice remotely and permitting video-based interpretation, subject to specific safeguards. Paul, you are asking for continual review of live links, and we feel that it would be more appropriate to include those safeguards in the Bill. We know the size and scale of the PACE codes, having received 100-plus pages of them, and think that it is critical for any new primary legislation to ensure absolute legal certainty and guarantee robust parliamentary scrutiny. Embedding such protections in statute has the potential to supplement our efforts to prevent any attempt to bypass or dilute fundamental rights through secondary legislation or guidance. I will finish by reiterating our call for Members to support amendment Nos 49 to 51.

1,121 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:46 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification