Secret Court gets a hammering from Clegg

Moves to create "secret justice" in Britain have suffered a blow after Nick Clegg warned the Prime Minister he could not support the current plans.

The intervention by Mr Clegg came as an influential group of MPs and peers savaged proposals to hold more inquests and court cases behind closed doors.
The plans are aimed at ensuring that sensitive evidence from the security services is not made public in open courts.
Mr Clegg's objection was set out in a letter to the National Security Council - chaired by David Cameron - in which he warned that major changes were needed to the plans before they could get backing from Liberal Democrat colleagues.

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16202310

I realy don't know why the government feel the need for this legislation ,i thought we already had a system in place for dealing with sensitive information in court cases

I like how Clegg has the occasional public show of concern and backbone before invariably falling in line. I suspect this, alongside the Internet surveillance, will go though unchanged after the Liberal Democrats get told what to do and Labour dithers with some half-hearted cowardly response (usually refusing to offer much of an opinion of the bills but, darn it, didn't the government mishandle it?).

Originally Posted by Damien

I like how Clegg has the occasional public show of concern and backbone before invariably falling in line. I suspect this, alongside the Internet surveillance, will go though unchanged after the Liberal Democrats get told what to do and Labour dithers with some half-hearted cowardly response (usually refusing to offer much of an opinion of the bills but, darn it, didn't the government mishandle it?).

Ken Clark let the cat out of the bag in my opinion with this statement

Some of the evidence disclosed in those cases was based on material supplied by the CIA and, ever since, Clarke said, the US intelligence services had become "nervous that we're going to start revealing some of the information".
"They have started cutting back, I'm assured, on what they disclose," he said, while cautioning that he had not been given specific details. "I'm told that in fact the Americans have been extremely cautious since the Binyam Mohamed case and it's getting in the way of co-operation."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/a...?newsfeed=true

Reading between the lines the government is trying to get this through to keep the yanks happy and to ensure they can extradite and prosecute people on the flimsiest of evidence with no due process

[Osem]

Perhaps Clegg will also have something to say about the secrecy of the family courts:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...et-courts.html

Originally Posted by Osem

Perhaps Clegg will also have something to say about the secrecy of the family courts:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...et-courts.html

That's worrying for so many reasons ,the least of which is that it doesn't seem to be common knowledge that this happens

[mertle]

Cleggy backside getting sore for all the times he had to bend over.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...derbuss-tories

Now he decides to toughen up too late cleggy boy your hands have blood on them like the conservatives.

You shafted own beliefs time and time again for power.

Now with eye to next election 2015 you starting to find a backbone your party cleggy boy is a withering bloodsucking leach.

Your party gone boy it will take alot for those to trust your party again.

If you got any courage you would do the honorable thing walk. Your just yellow spineless coward.

Originally Posted by mertle

blunderbuss-tories

Now he decides to toughen up too late cleggy boy your hands have blood on them like the conservatives.

I wouldn't go quite that far as to say he has "toughened" up ,my own rather cynical view on this is that he has been told to offer some objection so it appears to be an all coalition decision with meaningful debate on the issue ,arriving at a conclusion that satisfies both judiciary and public ,when in reality the yanks want it pushed through or Britain can't come play with them anymore

[mertle]

Originally Posted by martyh

I wouldn't go quite that far as to say he has "toughened" up ,my own rather cynical view on this is that he has been told to offer some objection so it appears to be an all coalition decision with meaningful debate on the issue ,arriving at a conclusion that satisfies both judiciary and public ,when in reality the yanks want it pushed through or Britain can't come play with them anymore

good points

come to think local councils aint anything to do with this

On lib/dems talk mumourings of break up so we could end up again with liberals and democrats again.

Too articles which went under radar suggest lib/dems will shatter. It maybe why Clegg now trying appease his own party.

First shows there is many issues

http://solutionfocusedpolitics.wordp...liberal-forum/

Second is analysis of there shoddy by election result why the party wont survive together libs say there not democrats.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ib-dems-result


if they fracture blame game will be full swing who did what.

Originally Posted by mertle

Cleggy backside getting sore for all the times he had to bend over.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...derbuss-tories

Now he decides to toughen up too late cleggy boy your hands have blood on them like the conservatives.

You shafted own beliefs time and time again for power.

Now with eye to next election 2015 you starting to find a backbone your party cleggy boy is a withering bloodsucking leach.

Your party gone boy it will take alot for those to trust your party again.

If you got any courage you would do the honorable thing walk. Your just yellow spineless coward.

Nice to have a rational, reasoned discussion.

[Fawkes]

Originally Posted by martyh

<snip>
i thought we already had a system in place for dealing with sensitive information in court cases

We do it's called the judge. Politicians and civil servants should not be involved.

Originally Posted by martyh

<SNIP>
Reading between the lines the government is trying to get this through to keep the yanks happy and to ensure they can extradite and prosecute people on the flimsiest of evidence with no due process

Again the Americans can butt out. I don't blame them though, we are the ones bending over, and they are just doing what they do best.

Originally Posted by Osem

Perhaps Clegg will also have something to say about the secrecy of the family courts:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...et-courts.html

Originally Posted by martyh

That's worrying for so many reasons ,the least of which is that it doesn't seem to be common knowledge that this happens

Some of this came out during the super injunctions thing. That’s one part of the law that does need reforming, but I think sometimes they are taking children away because they are afraid of another high profile mistake. I'm not going to pretend it's easy to get the balance right.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Fawkes

Some of this came out during the super injunctions thing. That’s one part of the law that does need reforming, but I think sometimes they are taking children away because they are afraid of another high profile mistake. I'm not going to pretend it's easy to get the balance right.

Yes, I imagine there are various reasons for the state in which we find ourselves, most of them probably well intentioned. It can't be right, however, that parents are apparently being routinely denied access to the evidence on which they're being judged and that there's no scrutiny of the way in which decisions are being made.

[Fawkes]

Originally Posted by Osem

<snip>
It can't be right, however, that parents are apparently being routinely denied access to the evidence on which they're being judged and that there's no scrutiny of the way in which decisions are being made.

I couldn't agree more.

"Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done."

From R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy (1924)