Terror suspects win High Court case on secret evidence
Two men suspected of terrorist-related activities have won a landmark High Court battle against government use of secret evidence to deny them bail.
Two judges ruled that a person cannot be denied bail solely on the basis of secret evidence.
Human rights solicitors have described the judgement as a "historic" victory.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson called the ruling "unhelpful" and will seek to appeal. If he fails, the men - branded security risks - could be freed.
Saying he was "surprised and disappointed", Mr Johnson added: "My sole objective is protecting the public and this judgement will make that job harder.
"We will do everything possible to keep this country safe and are taking steps accordingly in the light of this unhelpful judgment."
Alan, it might be helpful in protecting the public if we had a law allowing all suspects to be denied knowledge of any charge against them. Conviction rates would soar, as would the amount prison buildings. There would be no need for juries and we could save money...
Seriously, it would be more helpful if government lawyers had a better understanding of the law or the relevant minister if he or she ignores good legal advice in favour of draconian measures.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Another example of a botched NuLabor law, knee jerkingly enacted and, then interpreted by an imbecile who thinks he knows better than the judiciary.
ReplyDeleteEven Jess (Postman Pat's cat) could do a better job!