Secret courts Bill is mauled by peers

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostThu Nov 22, 2012 4:44 am » by Noentry


Peers delivered a series of humiliating defeats on Wednesday night to government plans to introduce secret courts.

he House of Lords said the proposals were a “radical departure” from the cornerstone of justice.

Ministers want to allow some civil cases involving national security to be heard behind closed doors so sensitive material can be disclosed.

They want to avoid having to settle out of court to avoid such information being exposed. Claimants would not be allowed to hear the secret evidence against them.

The Justice and Security Bill suffered a mauling in the House of Lords as peers voted through a series of amendments to water down the plans.

They backed moves to give judges more discretion on whether the case should be heard in secret – so called closed material procedures.

Another successful amendment requires judges to balance the harm caused by disclosing sensitive

information with the principle of open justice. Claimants will now also be able to demand a secret hearing, rather than just the Government, if they believe the intelligence services hold information that might help their case.

The amendments, which all passed with large majorities, were put forward by the cross-bench peer Lord Pannick, a leading QC and human rights lawyer.

He said the Bill risked the “integrity of the judicial process”.

He told the House the procedures were “a radical departure from common law principles, which we would all respect and approve, that a party to a case has the right to see the evidence against him and has a chance to answer it”.

A substantial number of Liberal Democrats backed Lord Pannick. Twelve Lib Dems, including ministers, voted with the Government on two amendments but many others rebelled.

Lord Beecham, the Labour justice spokesman, backed Lord Pannick’s safeguards. He said the Government’s proposals were a “radical departure from the cornerstone of our legal system”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... peers.html

The House of Lords does have its moments, and this is one of the finer ones.
I know what you are about to say "but it wont change a thing in the end juryless courts will happen."
Well not today.
:flop:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 8:41 pm

PostThu Nov 22, 2012 10:12 am » by Bandanko


I read this article this morning and tbh I was actually shocked. I thought the House of Lords would be complicit in the secret hearings and government secrecy that is so persuasive in the UK establishment. Kudos to the old boys(and girls) for shooting this down in flames :flop:

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostThu Nov 22, 2012 8:03 pm » by Noentry


Bandanko wrote:I read this article this morning and tbh I was actually shocked. I thought the House of Lords would be complicit in the secret hearings and government secrecy that is so persuasive in the UK establishment. Kudos to the old boys(and girls) for shooting this down in flames :flop:


Yeah shows not all in the house of Lords are complicit with tptb, many genuinely care about Britain.

They are going to amend it so lets see, hopefully it will not make it through in even a diluted version.
:cheers:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:36 pm

PostThu Nov 22, 2012 8:08 pm » by Tuor10


Not all of them have faulty programming. Some of the old guard still believe in clean government.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostSat Nov 24, 2012 3:57 am » by Noentry


Bandanko I was concerned this would go through uncontested, but the house of Lords still has peers who love and protect the rule of law, this is apparent.
:cheers:


Tuor10 wrote:Not all of them have faulty programming. Some of the old guard still believe in clean government.


Some do indeed Tuor10
:flop:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Writer
User avatar
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:18 pm

PostSat Nov 24, 2012 4:03 am » by Paradoxical_Anarchy


Are they are not standing against something that is now already in common practice?

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostSat Nov 24, 2012 4:20 am » by Noentry


Paradoxical_Anarchy wrote:Are they are not standing against something that is now already in common practice?


I think the jury less courts at the moment are supposed to be only for big financial cases, where the jury finds it difficult to get to grips with a year or two long financial case.

This has been pushed through to safe guard the government from embarrassing revelations from what they deem national security cases.

This new set of laws is designed to take away the jury from the legal system.
See no evil.
Hear no evil.
Speak no evil.
one happy establishment.
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook