KEY POINTS:
The National Party has backed down and will support a Government bill scrapping pre-trial depositions hearings so victims of crime do not have to give evidence twice.
The two major parties will now vote together to pass the Criminal Procedure Bill, which had stalled in Parliament for more than a year.
It will introduce exceptions to the double jeopardy rule, 11-1 jury verdicts and allow for methamphetamine cases to be shifted from the High Court down to the District Court.
Labour did not have a majority to pass it without National - which supported everything but abolishing depositions hearings.
That changed yesterday, after National's justice spokesman, Simon Power, met Courts Minister Rick Barker to resolve the impasse.
The meeting followed a Weekend Herald investigation published last Saturday where the Chief High Court Judge, Justice Tony Randerson, made the rare move of pleading with Parliament to pass the legislation.
Justice Randerson wanted the bill passed because of the part that would allow methamphetamine trials to be moved down to the District Court, relieving the overloaded High Court. He acknowledged his comments on the workings of Parliament were rare but said it was in the public interest.
Mr Power said Justice Randerson's comments had helped to bring the parties together.
Depositions hearings, which decide if a case has enough evidence to go to trial, will be replaced by a judge deciding "on the papers", with witnesses called only in exceptional situations.
National negotiated a clause that will allow lawyers to be heard by the judge if they wish to call a witness.
National also asked that a two-year review of the change to depositions be made by the Solicitor-General.
National's backdown also came after pressure from crime victims this week, following comments from Lesley Elliott, mother of murdered Dunedin woman Sophie Elliott, who described giving evidence at last week's depositions hearing for accused Clayton Weatherston as "traumatic" and said she was appalled by the thought of having to do it again at trial.
The Sensible Sentencing Trust and Louise Nicholas backed the comments.
However, it was revealed yesterday that Mrs Elliott was not required by either the prosecution or defence to appear at the hearing. Her evidence could have been given in "hand-up" paperwork, meaning she had to appear only at the trial, but her personal request to appear was granted by the prosecution.
Mr Power said he was "mindful" of the victims' comments but had approached the Government on Tuesday before many were made.
Mr Barker said the Government welcomed National's move and would now move the bill through the final stages as quickly as possible.
He said officials believed the change to depositions could make up to 4000 hours of more court time available each year.
Defence lawyer Anthony Rogers, of the Criminal Bar Association, said National's backdown was "a sad development, to put it mildly".
Until this week, National had agreed with the association that depositions hearings removed complexities before a case got to trial, allowing deficiencies in the prosecution case to be examined and preventing miscarriages of justice.
"I don't think the people who've orchestrated this have any idea of its effects," Mr Rogers said.
Justice Randerson declined to comment last night.
