Legal Assistance at the Police Station: Shifts and contradictions in the context of COVID-19

The Covid-19 pandemic has presented severe challenges to the criminal justice system in England and Wales. The issue that received most public attention was the suspension of criminal trials and, in particular, the difficulties of conducting jury trials in the context of social distancing. Less publicised but no less problematic, were the challenges at the investigative stage of the criminal process, especially ensuring respect for the procedural rights of persons suspected of crime. A person arrested on suspicion of a criminal offence is entitled to ‘consult a solicitor privately at any time’ (PACE 1984, s. 58(1)). One response to the need for social distancing was a protocol, agreed between the CPS, NPCC, Law Society and a number of other professional bodies, under which police interviews may be conducted entirely ‘virtually’ or, where an interview physically takes place at a police station, with the suspect’s lawyer participating by telephone and/or other electronic means. In this way, the right to consult a solicitor under PACE is preserved, although it requires some ‘creativity’ in respect of the requirements of PACE Code of Practice C, para 6.8, which provides that a suspect is entitled to have their solicitor ‘present’ when they are interviewed. This chapter questions whether this ‘creative’ approach sufficiently respects the right to a lawyer and, in this context, also examines the latest ‘efficiency’ mechanism known as Pre-Charge Engagement