Requirement for Defence Statement not prejudicial
(Saint Lucia) The Board was asked whether the provisions of the St Lucia Criminal Code 2004 and Criminal Procedure Rules 2008, concerning the requirements for a Defence Statement in advance of a criminal trial, were consistent with the Constitution of St Lucia and the right to a fair trial. On failing to provide a defence statement, he was warned that adverse inferences might be drawn at trial. He said that the requirement infringed his right of silence.
Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. If the defendant intended merely to require the prosecution to prove its case, he need only make this clear. Any impact on the right of silence was justified by the need for case management, to assist the prosecution in identifying the need for disclosure, might assist the further investigation to the asisstance of the defendant, and might lead to a discontinuance and or avoid delay.
Lord Mance, Lord Kerr,Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge, Sir Ronald Weatherup
[2017] UKPC 26, [2017] WLR(D) 554
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Constitutional, Human Rights
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.593586
