Jago Russell, Policy Officer for Liberty, said:
“This long-awaited Bill will not provide desperately needed protection for all victims of gross negligence and their families unless deaths in custody are included.
Families like the Mubareks, whose son was killed by his racist and psychopathic cellmate, have just as much right to justice as those who lose loved ones in tragedies at work.”
The Bill will hold companies to account when their gross negligence kills and was amended by Peers in a 223 to 127 vote on 5 February to include deaths in prisons, secure children’s homes, immigration removal centres, and police cells.
The amendment was tabled by Labour Peer Lord Judd, Conservative Peer Lord Hunt, Lib-Dem Peer Lord Lee, and Crossbench Peer Lord Ramsbotham and is supported by Liberty, the Prison Reform Trust, Justice, and Inquest.
Contact: Jen Corlew on 0207 378 3656 or 0797 3 831 128
NOTES TO EDITORS 1. A copy of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill Briefing May 2007 by Liberty, Justice, Inquest and the Prison Reform Trust is available on the
policy pages of Liberty's website.
2. Liberty welcomes the proposal for a statutory offence of corporate manslaughter which will fill a significant gap in existing criminal law and could provide justice to families who lose loved ones in terrible incidents like the Hatfield derailment, the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise or the many work-place deaths that occur each year.
3. The Lords’ amendment could bring justice to families that lose loved ones in circumstances like the tragic cases of Victoria Climbie, Zahid Mubarek, Baha Mousa, Jean Charles de Menezes, Naomi Bryant or the young recruits who died in Deepcut barracks. Justice for bereaved families should not depend on who was grossly negligent or what activities they were carrying on at the time. A mother whose son is killed as a result of a grossly negligent decision to place him in the same cell as a dangerous psychopath has just as much right to justice as a mother whose son is killed by the grossly negligent handling of dangerous machinery in a factory.
4. The UK is obliged under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights to establish a legal framework in which those responsible for homicides may be brought to justice. The Joint Committee on Human Rights has concluded that excluding deaths in custody would put the UK in breach of its Article 2 obligations.
5. Despite misconceptions about the deaths in custody amendment, it would not lead to a corporate manslaughter prosecution for every death in custody; would not impose criminal liability upon individuals; would not impact on how police respond to public threats or emergencies; and would not allow questions of ‘public policy’ to be decided by the courts.
