One of the country's leading criminal lawyers is calling for the "victim surcharge" to be scrapped when there isn't a victim. Nick Freeman, who is best known for successfully defending some of the country's top celebrities, has now written to Solicitor General Vera Baird asking her to change the law when it involves victimless crime such as speeding. He has also posted a petition on the Downing Street website requesting the Government to re-think its surcharge policy.
Introduced as part of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, the victim surcharge came into play in April 2007, when the Home Office announced that all fines for criminal charges would carry an additional flat-rate charge of £15 to fund a better support service for victims of crime.
However, Mr Freeman says when an offence doesn't involve a victim then the surcharge should be waived. He said: "This is a system created to help victims of crime which, if executed properly, would be a fantastic way of improving the service they receive. However, it is inconsistent and fundamentally flawed. We seem to be in a situation where some of those convicted of a crime which involves a victim are getting away without paying. It was revealed last December that a technical fault with the courts' computer systems meant that only offenders receiving fines went on to pay the surcharge. Therefore, those committing the more serious offences, which resulted in jail or community service, did not. Consequently only £1.1m of the £16m target has been raised. This is clearly a massive shortfall which in affect renders the system redundant. This week, a Freedom of Information Request was sent to the Attorney General, asking how much money the victim surcharge has raised to date. This was rejected, stating that the Information Commissioners Office does not hold the information and directed the request elsewhere." Mr Freeman added: "The courts are operating a completely unjust system. Yet again the motorist is the soft target and the one the courts come down the heaviest on."
In April 2007, when challenged on why the victim surcharge was being levied on people who commit offences that often have no victims, such as motorists, Mike O'Brien, the then Solicitor General, said: "I don't accept that there is never a victim in motoring offences. Motoring offences are not victimless crimes. Some 3,201 people were killed on Britain's roads in 2005, while 28,954 people were seriously injured and the total number of casualties was 271,000. Other so-called victimless crimes cause harm and create a cost to society through bringing the offender to justice and enforcing the sentence imposed. Money from the surcharge is going directly to help victim's services."
Nick Freeman concluded: "Motorists are continually penalised and already pay court costs and fines when offences are committed, so they should not have to pay into a victim support fund when their 'crime' has not affected anyone else. I propose that the victim surcharge should only be implemented when there is a clear victim of the crime, and not for every crime committed. Alternatively the surcharge will operate as a selective stealth tax."
Be the first to rate this post
- Currently 0/5 Stars.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5