Public confidence needs to be restored following high-profile failed prosecutions, according to an MHK.

Jason Moorhouse (Arbory, Castletown and Malew) raised the issue in Tynwald with Attorney General John Quinn, asking about the process before deciding upon a prosecution and what reviews took place when they failed.

He asked: ’Following several high-profile cases being dismissed early or ending in failure and severe criticism by the deemsters, how will these issues be resolved and public confidence returned?’

Mr Quinn replied: ’Whenever a case is discontinued or withdrawn, or indeed if a not-guilty plea is rendered by a jury or the case dismissed by the court, I carry out a detailed review and clearly we will learn whatever lessons are necessary from the outcome of that case.’

Last month, as the Isle of Man Examiner reported on page 1, the prosecution in a money laundering case decided not to continue after the credibility and truthfulness of a key witness from the Financial Services Authority was questioned. The deemster warned the prosecutor that if he did not withdraw the case he faced a ’scathing judgment’.

Earlier, Mr Quinn had explained prosecutors must be satisfied there is sufficient evidence to provide a ’realistic prospect of conviction’ and there was also a public interest test.

Any decision to prosecute was peer-reviewed by a second prosecutor.

Anyone unhappy with a decision to prosecute could call on the attorney general to review, said Mr Quinn.

’At the conclusion of a prosecution, issues which may have arisen during the case are brought to my attention, if appropriate,’ he said.

’In particular, if a prosecution is unsuccessful or discontinued, the director of prosecution is required to bring the matter and the circumstances to my attention and I then review the matter and, if I consider it necessary, call for a detailed examination of the case to be carried out.’