Liberty - Protecting civil liberties, promoting human rights

The highly critical report by the prestigious cross-party committee from both Houses of Parliament concludes that Ministers have failed to make a case for extending Closed Material Procedures (CMPs) to all civil proceedings and inquests. It agrees with Special Advocates – the very lawyers forced to try and run closed hearings – that such proceedings are ‘inherently unfair’ and says there is no justification for replacing the current law on sensitive material – Public Interest Immunity – with CMPs.

Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty, said: “Perhaps this damning report shows Parliament finally asserting itself over the increasingly cocky demands of the spooks.

“First they want private chats with judges to replace open justice; then total access to all our internet browsing and communications. No scrutiny for them and no privacy for us. Is it time to ask who runs Britain?"

Dr Hywel Francis MP, Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, said: “I was troubled that the Lord Chancellor did not seem to think that the proposals in the Green Paper were as radical a departure from our longstanding traditions of open justice and fairness as I, the Committee and many others believe them to be.

“Closed Material Procedures are inherently unfair and the Government has failed to show that extending their use might in some instances contribute to greater fairness.”

Proposals in the Secret Justice Green Paper would allow Ministers to shut out claimants from their own actions against the State to defend the ‘public interest’ – limiting vital scrutiny and undermining the crucial constitutional principle that no-one, including the Government, is above the law.

Contact: Liberty Press Office on 020 7378 3656 or 07973 831128

NOTES TO EDITORS:

1. The report by the Joint Committee on Human Rights also found there was no case for reform that would provide the US with a cast-iron guarantee that intelligence shared with the UK can never be disclosed in a British court – and called on the Government to address the US’ apparent misperception that UK courts cannot be trusted with national security-sensitive material. It also expressed regret that the Green Paper fails to consider the impact of the proposals on the freedom and ability of the press to report on matters of public interest and concern.

2. CMPs essentially allow the Government to present evidence to a judge without having to disclose it to the whole court, including the defendant or claimant (depending on whether it’s a criminal or civil trial). Originally devised for application in the immigration system and first introduced in 1997, they are a mechanism currently used in certain types of specialist proceedings and only in a very small number of cases. The use of CMPs, even to this limited extent, has been controversial and subject to unending litigation. Despite this, the present consultation proposes to extend the mechanism to “any civil proceedings in which sensitive material is relevant”. It proposes that the law should be changed so that where a Minister decides that certain material, if openly disclosed, would cause damage to the public interest, he or she should be able sign a certificate that would prevent the material being disclosed to the other side, while allowing the Government to put the material before a judge and rely on it in defending or pursuing a claim through the courts. Being able to present evidence to a judge without the other side having the chance to refute it or even know what it is obviously gives the Government a huge advantage in legal proceedings and the potential to present a very one-sided or misleading version of events.

3. For more information about For Their Eyes Only, Liberty’s campaign against the Secret Justice Green Paper, visit: www.fortheireyesonly.co.uk

4. Read Liberty’s response to the Secret Justice Green Paper: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/pdfs/policy12/liberty-s-response-to-the-ministry-of-justice-consultati.pdf