|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings & Torture |
|
February 13th,
2010 - Lawyers Urge Court of Appeal to Publish Key Part of Draft Ruling |
|
Lawyers Urge Court
of Appeal to Publish Key Part of Binyam Mohamed Draft Ruling Lord Neuberger’s excised observations have compelling public interest,
court of appeal told By Richard Norton-Taylor The Guardian February 13, 2010 Lawyers representing Binyam Mohamed,
the civil rights groups Liberty, Justice, and Index on Censorship, and media
organisations including the Guardian, the Times and the BBC, urged the court
of appeal today to publish a key passage in its draft ruling that evidence of
MI5 complicity in the mistreatment of the British resident must be released. A paragraph drawn up Lord Neuberger,
master of the rolls, was suppressed following the intervention of the
government's lawyer, Jonathan Sumption QC. In a letter sent to Neuberger
without the knowledge of defence lawyers, Sumption said the paragraph
suggested that MI5 officers "deliberately misled" parliament's
intelligence and security committee, shared a "culture of
suppression" and "does not in fact operate a culture that respects
human rights". In what Neuberger admits was
an "over-hasty" response he excised the offending paragraph without
giving lawyers representing other parties in the case the opportunity to
respond to Sumption's objections. The submissions sent to the
appeal court today are confidential but human rights and media groups say the
evidence reflects the criticisms Sumption complains about. There is a compelling public
interest in the full judgment observations being restored, they have argued,
and the government has no right to suppress judicial criticism of MI5
officers. If ministers were allowed to
do so, the reputation of the judiciary would be harmed. Richard Stein of the law
firm Leigh Day, which represents Mohamed, said: "The whole case has been
about who writes the judgments - judges or the government.The government
seeking to influence a draft judgment is a very worrying development."
Reprieve, the legal charity which represented Mohamed in the US courts while
he was detained in Guantanamo, said: "If the government really wants to
clear up the confusion over MI5's conduct in this case, they must release the
policy that was in place at the time. Releasing a new, cleaned-up version
will not reassure anyone about these persistent and damaging
allegations." Its executive director,
Clare Agar, said: "It is offensive to suggest that by fighting torture
through the British legal system, Reprieve and others are giving succour to
our enemies." Media groups, including the Guardian,
were today given leave to appeal against a high court ruling obtained by the government,
that evidence in a civil suit for compensation brought by British citizens
and residents must not be revealed to them or their lawyers. External link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/13/binyam-mohamed-appeal-court-judgment |