UK plans for secret courts 'dangerous'
The Queen unveiled the proposals in a speech to MPs and peers
© AFP/Getty Images
UK government plans to end centuries of open justice by allowing some
court evidence to be heard behind closed doors are "dangerous", Amnesty
International said.
The proposed legal changes, part of the
Justice and Security Bill, could result in information and evidence of
human rights violations by UK state representatives, being kept secret.
Plans
by the government to introduce new legislation were confirmed in the
Queen’s speech during Wednesday’s state opening of the UK Parliament.
“These proposals are dangerous and should be dropped," said Tara Lyle, Policy Adviser at Amnesty International UK.
“They
will allow the government to throw a cloak of secrecy over wrongdoing,
including matters as serious as the alleged involvement by UK officials
in rendition, secret detention, enforced disappearances and torture."
The
Bill would allow for the use of “closed material procedures” in future
civil claims cases. This would allow the courts to consider secret
material presented by UK authorities in closed sessions.
Claimants
and their lawyers of choice would not have access to the material or
the closed sessions and would, instead, have a court appointed Special
Advocate to represent their interests.
The Special Advocate
would be prohibited from discussing any part of the secret material with
the claimant or taking instructions from them after seeing the
material, seriously impeding their ability to serve the interests of the
claimant.
Amnesty International considers that the use of
Special Advocates fails to sufficiently mitigate the unfairness of
“closed material procedures”.
Amnesty International believes
the right to redress and a fair trial for victims of alleged human
rights violations could be critically undermined by the proposals.
The
proposals for the Bill come amid allegations that the UK has been
involved in rendition, unlawful detention and mistreatment.
“After
David Cameron promised to get to the bottom of allegations of
complicity in human rights violations by UK officials, this Bill is a
sell-out to the security services," said Tara Lyle.
“The victims
of human rights violations as well as the general public have a right
to learn the truth about whether and how government officials have been
involved in rendition, secret detention, enforced disappearances and
torture.”
“If members of the intelligence and security services
are suspected of involvement in human right violations, the government
should not be able to invoke ‘national security’ to avoid real
accountability.”
Source :
Amnesty
---------------------------------
Every email and computer click to be stored in huge expansion of surveillance state unveiled in the Queen's Speech
- State will be able to people's internet browsing history and emails
- Campaigners say there will be 'no scrutiny for them and no privacy for us'
- Plans for secret courts watered down after opposition
By
Rick Dewsbury
Controversial plans to snoop on emails and text messages came one step closer today after being unveiled in the Queen's Speech.
Police
will be given powers to secretly access people's internet browsing
history and see who they have been contacting, for how long and when.
The
measures will be published in a draft form after the Queen unveiled the
Communications Data Bill in the House of Lords today.
Campaigners immediately reacted with concern, saying the laws will 'allow no scrutiny for them and no privacy for us.'
Politicians
of all parties should remember the values everyone is supposed to share
before pushing through the reforms, civil rights group Liberty said.
Plans
to enable courts to sit behind closed doors when considering issues of
national security and powers to monitor emails and internet
communications will all be part of the Government’s programme of reforms
in the next 12 months.
Shami
Chakrabarti, Liberty’s director, said: 'Two years ago, the coalition
bound itself together with promises and action to protect our rights and
freedoms.
'As the strains
of governing in a recession begin to show, politicians of all parties
should remember the values that we are all supposed to share.
'Whilst
action on free speech is extremely welcome, proposals for secret courts
and a snoopers’ charter risk allowing no scrutiny for them and no
privacy for us.'
Under the
draft Communications Data Bill, authorities would not be able to view
the content of email and text messages, but could identify who someone
was contacting, how often and for how long, and could also access
internet browsing history.
Under surveillance: In future, every website
visit via your iPad or laptop would be kept for a fixed period by your
internet service provider
The Government has said the plans are
needed to tackle crime and terrorism and to ensure the police and
security services can keep pace with developments in technology.
But they have already exposed tensions within the coalition over its stance on civil liberties.
The
communications data will be kept for up to 12 months by service
providers and the role of the Interception of Communications
Commissioner will also be extended to oversee the collection of the
data.
The Justice and
Security Bill will also reform the way sensitive evidence from the
security services is handled in national security cases. This bill will
enable secret court cases.
The Queen said the plans would be brought forward, 'subject to scrutiny of draft clauses'.
£2bn scheme: GCHQ, in Cheltenham, where under
new rules being brought in by the Government - along with secret courts -
would allow an electronic 'listening' agency to see who a person is
communicating with and when
It comes after Deputy
Prime Minister Nick Clegg made clear the proposals could only proceed if
they took into account and protected civil liberties.
Under
the moves, a defendant or claimant and their lawyer would be barred
from the closed part of the hearing, removing the adversarial nature of
the justice system and leading to fears that evidence may not be tested
properly and miscarriages of justice could take place.
Justice
Secretary Kenneth Clarke has said the powers were needed to ensure
other countries, particularly the United States, were happy to share
intelligence without fear of it being exposed in British courts.
It
is also designed to ensure courts can fully consider all the evidence
in civil claims made against the Government to prevent it being forced
to settle cases which it believes has no merit.
It follows secret multi-million pound
payouts to 16 terrorism suspects, including former Guantanamo Bay
detainee Binyam Mohamed, last November after they claimed they had been
mistreated by security and intelligence officials.
Nick
Pickles, director of the civil liberties campaign group Big Brother
Watch, said: 'The Home Office have been very good at saying what the
problem is, but seem intent on keeping the technical details of what
they are proposing secret.
'Is it any wonder that the public are scared by a proposal for online surveillance not seen in any other Western democracy?
'If
someone is suspected of plotting an attack the powers already exist to
tap their phone, read their email and follow them on the street.
'Instead
of scaremongering, the Home Office should come forward and engage with
the debate about how we improve public safety, rather than pursue a
policy that will indiscriminately spy on everyone online while the real
threats are driven underground and escape surveillance.'
A
Home Office spokeswoman said: 'It is vital that police and security
services are able to obtain communications data in certain circumstances
to investigate serious crime and terrorism and to protect the public.
'We need to take action to maintain the continued availability of communications data as technology changes.
'Communications
data has played a role in every major Security Service
counter-terrorism operation over the past decade and in 95 per cent of
all serious organised crime investigations.
'It is vital to law enforcement, especially when dealing with organised crime gangs, paedophile rings and terrorist groups.'
Clare
Algar, the executive director of Reprieve, warned the introduction of
closed courts 'will put the Government above the law'.
'The
proposals for secret justice would massively skew courts in favour of
ministers, and prevent the public from finding out the truth about
serious wrongdoing,' she said.
'The
reality is that these plans are designed to spare the intelligence
agencies embarrassment. They are a recipe for unfair and unaccountable
Government.'
Amnesty International UK said the proposals for secret courts were 'dangerous and should be dropped'.
Tara
Lyle, the campaign group’s policy adviser, said: 'They will allow the
Government to throw a cloak of secrecy over wrongdoing, including
matters as serious as the alleged involvement by UK officials in human
rights violations like rendition, secret detention and torture.
'After
David Cameron promised to get to the bottom of allegations of
complicity in human rights violations by UK officials, this Bill is a
sell-out to the security services.'
A
Ministry of Justice spokeswoman said: 'These proposals will extend
civil (not criminal) justice so that cases which are currently not heard
by the courts, are heard.
'They
will mean that allegations made against the Government will be fully
investigated and scrutinised by the courts, and that the Government will
no longer have to settle cases which it believes have no merit.”
She
added: 'Closed material procedures are already used in the UK justice
system in several areas including immigration, employment, control
order, parole board and proscription hearings.'
-------------------------------------------------
SECRET COURTS TO GO AHEAD... BUT PLANS WILL BE WATERED DOWN WITH NEW CLAUSES
Controversial secret courts will go ahead amid strong opposition from civil liberties campaigners.
The Justice and Security Bill will reform the way sensitive evidence from the security services is
handled in national security cases. This bill will enable secret court
cases.
The Queen said the plans would be brought forward, 'subject to scrutiny of draft clauses'.
It comes after Deputy Prime Minister Nick
Clegg made clear the proposals could only proceed if they took into
account and protected civil liberties.
Under the moves, a defendant or claimant
and their lawyer would be barred from the closed part of the hearing,
removing the adversarial nature of the justice system and leading to
fears that evidence may not be tested properly and miscarriages of
justice could take place.
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has said
the powers were needed to ensure other countries, particularly the
United States, were happy to share intelligence without fear of it being
exposed in British courts.
It is also designed to ensure courts can
fully consider all the evidence in civil claims made against the
Government to prevent it being forced to settle cases which it believes
has no merit.
It follows secret multi-million pound
payouts to 16 terrorism suspects, including former Guantanamo Bay
detainee Binyam Mohamed, last November after they claimed they had been
mistreated by security and intelligence officials.
Comments