We have not raised Mr Ghanem's specific case directly with the Egyptians, but we regularly raise pre-trial detention cases, restrictions on media freedom and detentions of political activists with Egypt, both in London and Cairo. Lord [Tariq] Ahmad of Wimbledon discussed human rights with the Egyptian Ambassador on 20 February and with Foreign Minister Shoukry on 28 March. The Foreign Secretary raised human rights with FM Shoukry on 29 April.

We also raise human rights issues multilaterally through our Human Rights Council Item 4 Statements and detail our concerns through our Annual Human Rights and Development Reports.

I have already outlined the extra payments that are being made to pensioners and those on benefits and disability, and the fact that pensions, benefits and the minimum wage have all gone up in line with inflation. On top of that, the UK Government have delivered five towns funds, four growth deals, three rounds of levelling-up funding, two investment zones, two freeports, an electric arc furnace in south Wales and an electrified rail line in north Wales—and what are we getting from the Welsh Labour Government? We are getting £120 million spent on extra Senedd Members. While we level up the economy, they want to level up the number of politicians in Cardiff Bay.

As I have set out, we are looking at all those reports and we will make a decision in our own time. Britain is not falling short in that respect, because we are currently fully funded on all the earlier commitments we made. We will look at the Office of Internal Oversight Services report and the UNRWA reaction to it. We are aware of non-traditional donors and private donations coming in, and UNRWA is fully funded until the end of May. When we reach our conclusion, I will be sure to inform the House of it.

Data on the protected characteristics of SJP users, under the descriptor of “online plea for the Single Justice Service”, can be found at: HMCTS Protected Characteristics Questionnaire - Data on Users of Reformed Services - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

The published data covers SJP cases for May 2023 to July 2023 inclusive. The scope of this data collection is limited to cases dealt with via the Common Platform, which represents around 32% of SJP cases over this time period.

An updated view of the protected characteristics questionnaire is likely to be published in Autumn 2024.

The Single Justice Procedure (SJP) was introduced under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. Prior to the introduction of the procedure, in accordance with the Equalities Act 2010, an equality impact assessment was undertaken in relation to SJP. This concluded that on the basis of the available evidence, the planned change in summary justice would not lead to any positive or negative impact on people with protected characteristics.

HMCTS committed to the Justice Select Committee to collect protected characteristic data in all reform services. This includes protected characteristic data for SJP, which has been monitored since 2023.

The decision to prosecute under SJP is a decision for the prosecutor and not the Government.

The number of defendants dealt with via Single Justice Procedure (SJP) notifications at the magistrates’ courts is published as part of the National Statistics series ‘Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly’. Additionally, this series also provides the total number of defendants dealt with in the magistrates’ court, these can be used to calculate the proportion of SJPs in the magistrates’ caseload.

The latest published data is available to September 2023 and can be found in Tables T1 & T2 which are accessible by the following link: Criminal court statistics quarterly: July to September 2023 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

There were 251 distinct days in which Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases were heard in a magistrates’ court between October 2022 and September 2023.

The latest published data on completed SJP cases is available to September 2023 and can be found in Table T1 which is accessible at the following link: Criminal court statistics quarterly: July to September 2023 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

Based on this information, the average number of SJP cases completed per working day is 3,151. This excludes weekends and the 9 public holidays.

Promotion of the right to Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) is a longstanding priority for the UK. We frequently raise ethnic and religious minorities with the Government of Iraq and Kurdistan Regional Government, calling for greater protection and deeper inclusion in national and local government.

Although we welcome the announcement that Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) elections will be held on 10 June, we continue to assess the implications of the rulings by the Federal Supreme Court to remove 11 quota seats for ethnic and religious minorities.

Ministers and officials continue to raise Mr Alaa Abd El-Fattah's case at the highest levels with the Egyptian government and have been consistently clear in our calls for his release, while continuing to press the need for urgent consular access. The Foreign Secretary most recently raised his case with Egyptian Foreign Minister Shoukry on 22 February. The Foreign Secretary and Minister of State for the Middle East, Lord (Tariq) Ahmad of Wimbledon, also raised his case with President Sisi and Egyptian Foreign Minister Shoukry on 21 December 2023. The Prime Minister raised Mr El-Fattah's case with President Sisi on 1 December 2023.

I hope that I have set out my broad agreement with what the hon. Gentleman says. Britain wants to see steps taken against illegal settlements and settlers who have committed crimes—we want to see them arrested, tried and punished for those crimes. We want to see the Palestinian Authority reinvigorated, with new leadership and a strong approach to taking up the roles that it will need to fulfil when the sky clears and there is a moment for the political track to begin.

Magistrates have no powers to stop a prosecution on the grounds that it is not in the public interest. A magistrate can refer a case back to the prosecutor and request that they review their decision to prosecute. We do not hold any data on the number of times that this occurs. Alternatively, the magistrate can reduce the penalty imposed and even deal with the case by way of a conditional or absolute discharge. Guidance for magistrates on mitigating factors is provided in the sentencing guidelines.

It is down to the prosecutor to decide whether the prosecution is in the public interest. The defendant can seek independent legal advice if they wish to.

There are several safeguards built into the Single Justice Procedure (SJP) process to ensure a defendant’s fair trial rights are protected. Defendants retain the right to request a court hearing at any point before their case is considered by a magistrate under the SJP. SJP is available where they waive that right, either expressly, or by failing to respond to the notice, but only in circumstances where the court has first satisfied itself that the relevant documents were served on the accused.

HMCTS provides support channels to defendants who require clarification of information and processes in relation to the SJP ranging from web chat or telephone assistance to more intensive face-to-face assistance via our Courts & Tribunals Service Centre and the ‘We Are Group’ which provides digital support, advice and support.

The Government does not intervene in individual cases, including Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases, which are a matter for the independent judiciary.

SJP is used by a number of approved prosecutors. It is a more proportionate way of dealing with straightforward, uncontested, summary-only non-imprisonable offences. The prosecuting body cannot choose this route for any case which falls outside of these criteria. SJP also cannot be used in cases where a defendant pleads not guilty.

Where a guilty plea is submitted, defendants are able to enter mitigating circumstances, if they wish, alongside their guilty plea, to be considered by the magistrate dealing with their case. Cases where defendants have not responded to a notification that they are being prosecuted may also be dealt with under the SJP.

For prosecutors, guilty pleas and any entered mitigation are available on the system for them to review as soon as the plea is received online, or as soon as scanned into the system if received by post, however, prosecutors are not required to view this.

Often the defendants’ circumstances and any potential vulnerability are not known until they provide their mitigation. Any mitigation provided under SJP is considered by the magistrate in the same way that it would be in open court. Although prosecutors decide whether to offer defendants the option of having their case dealt with under the SJP, magistrates may refer a case to open court if they think that would be more appropriate rather than continuing under the SJP.

The mitigation provided sometimes suggests that the prosecution may not be in the public interest; a magistrate can then adjourn the case and ask the prosecution to review the mitigation. Alternatively, the magistrate can reduce the penalty imposed and even deal with the case by way of a conditional or absolute discharge. Guidance for magistrates on mitigating factors is provided in the sentencing guidelines.

Support channels are also available to defendants who require clarification of information and processes ranging from web chat or telephone assistance to more intensive face-to-face assistance.

The Government keeps all policies under review and listens to feedback from stakeholders on how they are working.

Whilst information on the number of Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases withdrawn or dismissed is available, we do not hold information on the number of prosecutions not progressed due to not being in the public interest due to the defendants' vulnerability.