Justice and Security Green Paper 2012

A new statutory power is proposed in the Justice & Security Green Paper to allow the Secretary of State to trigger Closed Material ProcedureUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. (CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court.) in all civil litigation where he considers that disclosure of ‘sensitive material’ may cause ‘damage to the public interest.’ CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. is a mechanism currently used – controversially – in a very small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders/Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs) and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. takes place entirely in private. It entitles the government to put material before a judge and rely on it in defending or pursuing their claim or defence without disclosing it to the other side.

Once CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. is triggered, not only are the public and press excluded from the court, but the claimant and their legal representative are also locked out. Instead, for the CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. hearing the claimant is appointed a Special Advocate. Unlike normal legal representatives, Special Advocates are unable to disclose material to the person whose interest they represent and are instead required to contest evidence against their ‘client’ on the basis of guesswork and estimation. The Special Advocate is not even allowed to communicate with the person concerned without government permission and can never communicate with them about the secret evidence.

Inquests

The Paper suggests coronial procedures where the inquest engages sensitive material will be subject to the same CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court.. The paper asks for views on amending the Coroners Rules to allow the coronerThe legal official who orders a post-mortem and who is in charge of the inquest procedure. to have a CMPUsed in a small number of specialist proceedings, for example control orders and deportation of foreign nationals on national security grounds. Takes place entirely in private, before a judge with the claimant and their legal representative, public and press excluded from the court. for part or all of an inquest (and providing for the deceased’s family to be represented by a Special Advocate in closed sessions, receiving gists of sensitive material); security vetting of family members; asking jurors to sign confidentiality agreements; requiring jurors to undergo security clearance; and light-touch vetting of jurors.

Twice before (in the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 and the Coroners and Justice Act 2009) attempts have been made by government to place restrictions on families’ ability to hear all relevant evidence during an inquest and both attempts were resoundingly rejected by parliamentarians.

INQUEST believes the current proposals are equally unnecessary and run counter to the recent legislative reform agreed by Parliament in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 which aims to put bereaved families at the heart of the inquest process.

For further information, see INQUEST’s briefings and press releases:

• GOVERNMENT WITHDRAWS PLANS FOR SECRET INQUESTS FROM JUSTICE AND SECURITY BILL 29 May 2012
• INQUEST RESPONSE TO INCLUSION IN QUEEN’S SPEECH OF PLANS FOR CLOSED MATERIAL PROCEDURES IN COURT HEARINGS 9 May 2012
• INQUEST RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE JCHR INQUIRY INTO THE JUSTICE AND SECURITY GREEN PAPER 4 April 2012
• INQUEST WELCOMES IPCC CALL FOR CHANGE TO LAW ON SENSITIVE EVIDENCE 29 March 2012
• INQUEST RESPONDS TO JUSTICE SECRETARY'S EVIDENCE ON CLOSED MATERIAL PROCEDURES 7 March 2012
• INQUEST TO GIVE EVIDENCE TO PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS’ INQUIRY INTO JUSTICE AND SECURITY GREEN PAPER 27 February 2012

• INQUEST, JUSTICE, Reprieve and Liberty host Parliamentary meeting: "Secret evidence, justice denied? The Justice and Security Green Paper" - Monday 12 March 6 March 2012
• INQUEST & ILG make submission to JCHR on Justice & Security Green Paper 24 January 2012
• INQUEST and ILG response to the Justice & Security Green paper 6 January 2012

Press coverage:

• Justice bill delayed by inquest row between Cameron and Clegg (The Guardian) 24 May 2012
• Queen's speech: plan for secret hearings in civil courts brought forward (The Guardian) 9 May 2012
• Campaigners damn Tory inquest plan (Morning Star Online) 3 May 2012
• Letter: Open inquests (The Guardian) 6 April 2012
• Letter: Secrecy, surveillance and the state (The Guardian) 5 April 2012
• Government plans to hold more secret court hearings attacked as 'unfair' and 'dangerous' (The Independent) 4 April 2012
• Secret justice (The Lawyer) 14 March 2012
• Lord Macdonald: Ministers wrong on CIA secret justice fears (Daily Telegraph) 13 March 2012
• Inquests MUST be open says British Legion chief who fears secret justice plans would 'compound grief of bereaved' (Daily Mail) 9 March 2012
• Parties unite against secret injustice: Horrified MPs and peers condemn Clarke's plan for court cases behind closed doors (Daily Mail) 1 March 2012

See also Liberty’s Secrets Out blog.