Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Parliament must now reject the government's attempts to abandon the fundamental right to open justice

Some very fine words have been expressed by judges of the Supreme Court and the majority who rejected the claims MI5 and MI6 intelligence that all who have gathered to be kept secret not only held by the public but their opponents in court.

"The principle of open justice is not merely a procedural rule," said Lord Dyson. "It is a fundamental principle of customary law." Parties are entitled to know the case against them, and the right to confront his accusers, he said.

"Any weakening in the face of advances in the methods and the use of secret evidence in a case like this would have to make attempts to broaden the scope of an exception to be made at the beginning of open justice, "said Lord Hope.

Mr Brown warned that the type of "closed process" wanted "mean that the claims relating to allegations of complicity, and torture by the British intelligence services abroad can be heard in the procedure which the plaintiffs were excluded, with the defenses could not see secret, secret evidence they could not question, and secret trials held by them and the public of all time. "

Proposals submitted by MI5 and MI6 "all the material presented to the judge and the claim that all this involves national security or other essential public interest will be very tempting to do," Mr. Kerr said.

The immediate trigger for the case of a claim for counsel to British citizens or residents imprisoned at Guantanamo. The prisoners, released today, filed a civil suit for damages, including conspiracy to torture. Security agencies and intelligence agencies has denied responsibility.

MI5 and MI6, the back of the home and foreign ministers, argued the process for pragmatic reasons. Approximately 250,000 potentially relevant documents involved. At least 140,000 will be screened, an exercise that took three years to complete, they said.

security services and intelligence agencies has left the civil and paid the former Guantanamo prisoners undisclosed sum, but significant money as compensation. However, the question remained agencies.

is proposed to extend the use of special advocates, is now used in the hearings of the Special Commission of Immigration Appeals (SIAC), which secretly examined the evidence for security agencies intelligence. The material will not be shown to the defendants or plaintiffs. There are no known cases against them, or see the witnesses in support of the allegations made by MI5 and MI6. Special advocates on their behalf.

Dyson said: "In many cases, the special advocate will be hampered by not being able to take instructions from his client in the closed material." He added:

Find best price for : --Guantánamo----Lord--


Blog Archive