Hard graft

The passage of the Bribery Bill through Second Reading in the House of Lords in December last year was so smooth that Lord Williamson described the debate as a “love-fest”. However, controversy still surrounds certain aspects of the proposed legislation. In January, 33 probing amendments were debated by the Grand Committee of the House of Lords. Omar Qureshi and Joe Smith of CMS Cameron McKenna LLP review the issues debated and consider the challenges that may lie ahead for both Government and UK business.

Omar Qureshi (+44 (0) 20 7367 2573; omar.qureshi@ cms-cmck.com) is a partner and Joe Smith (+44 (0) 20 7367 3158; joe.smith@cms-cmck.com) an associate in the Dispute Resolution Group of CMS Cameron McKenna LLP

General offences

Lord Lyell of Markyate, a previous Solicitor-General and Attorney General, commenced the debate by seeking to reintroduce the concept of ‘corrupt intent’ into the general offences. Standing as a lone voice against the conclusions of the Law Commission, the Joint Committee, the Government and almost everyone else, Lord Lyell thought that corruption was understood by 95% of the population and had “not caused trouble in the past” in obtaining convictions. In response, Lord Tunnicliffe noted that reintroducing ‘corruption’ as an element of the offence “would allow the old and failing current law, which we intend completely to reform, to haunt the application of the new law from beyond the grave.”