Written evidence submitted by Mark Egan, of the States of (SCC0008)

1. This note draws the Committee’s attention to the statutory scheme in Jersey for securing the attendance of witnesses and the provision of documents by scrutiny panels (the Island’s equivalent of departmental select committees) and the Public Accounts Committee. 2. Jersey is a Crown Dependency, separate from the , with its own (the States Assembly) and legal system. Primary legislation must be approved by the Privy Council and registered by Jersey’s Royal Court before it can come into effect. Prior to 2005, committees of the States Assembly had executive responsibilities in relation to the Island’s public services. In 2005 a ministerial system of government was introduced and the Assembly set up scrutiny panels to oversee government departments, akin to the UK’s system of departmental select committees. 3. Various constitutional provisions are to be found in the States of Jersey Law 2005, including, in Article 49, a power to make regulations to “confer powers on any committee or panel established by or in accordance with standing orders to require any person to (i) appear before it, and (ii) give evidence and produce documents to it”. Those regulations may provide for penalties in the event of non-compliance with an order by a committee or panel in relation to attendance to give evidence or the production of documents. 4. The States of Jersey (Powers, Privileges and Immunities) (Scrutiny Panels, PAC and PPC) (Jersey) Regulations 2006 contain the detailed provisions regarding the summonsing power. In summary, a scrutiny panel must first request a witness to appear (or a document to be produced) and must accommodate reasonable requirements that the witness might have, for example around the timing of a hearing or receiving documents in confidence. In addition, the panel is required to be satisfied that the evidence it seeks is relevant to the matter that it is investigating. The regulations set out procedural requirements for the contents of the summons as well as various grounds on which a summons may be challenged. Challenges are heard by the Assembly’s Privileges and Procedures Committee which may uphold a summons, uphold a summons with such alterations as it considers appropriate, or direct that a summons should not be obeyed. 5. A person who disobeys a summons (without reasonable excuse) is liable to a fine of up to £10,000. 6. As in the UK, the vast majority of witnesses appearing before scrutiny panels do so voluntarily and formal powers have only rarely been exercised. However, in 2015 a summons was issued by the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel for documents held by the States of Jersey Development Company (SoJDC) in relation to the development of land on the waterfront in St Helier for the construction of a new financial centre. The summons was appealed and the Privileges and Procedures Committee met in public in January 2016 to hear the appeal. The Committee’s decision has been published. 7. The documents required by the panel were commercially confidential. The grounds of challenge to the summons were that clear and enforceable arrangements for receiving the documents in confidence had not been offered by the panel; the summons was imprecise in terms of the documents demanded; the documents were not necessary for the panel’s work; and the prejudice to SoJDC of disclosing the documents far outweighed the usefulness to the panel of the information they contained. Human rights arguments on this last point were also heard. Counsel was engaged on both sides and the Privileges and Procedures Committee was assisted by the Island’s Solicitor General. 8. The Committee upheld the summons with various modifications about the manner in which the documents could be made available to the panel, which were intended to help protect their confidentiality. SoJDC complied with the terms of the summons. The panel subsequently asked for additional documents which were made available on the same basis by means of adding them to the scope of the Committee’s earlier decision. 9. I would be delighted to provide further information on Jersey’s approach to the problems which the Committee of Privileges is considering if that would be of assistance.

April 2017