This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/jul/01/secret-prosecution-of-terrorism-secret-raises-difficult-constitutional-issues

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Secret prosecution of terrorism secret raises 'difficult constitutional issues' Secret prosecution of terrorism suspect raises 'difficult constitutional issues'
(about 1 hour later)
The decisions that led to a terrorism suspect being prosecuted in conditions of almost unprecedented secrecy raise “really difficult constitutional issues” about the independence of prosecutors from government, the head of the judiciary in England and Wales warned on Wednesday.The Crown Prosecution Service had initially claimed that it might be unable to proceed with the trial unless Erol Incedal, a London law student, was prosecuted anonymously and in complete secrecy.That claim was made as a consequence of “representations from the executive”, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas pointed out at the court of appeal on Wednesday.The decisions that led to a terrorism suspect being prosecuted in conditions of almost unprecedented secrecy raise “really difficult constitutional issues” about the independence of prosecutors from government, the head of the judiciary in England and Wales warned on Wednesday.The Crown Prosecution Service had initially claimed that it might be unable to proceed with the trial unless Erol Incedal, a London law student, was prosecuted anonymously and in complete secrecy.That claim was made as a consequence of “representations from the executive”, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas pointed out at the court of appeal on Wednesday.
After an appeal from lawyers representing the media, arrangements were eventually made for a small group of journalists to be present during some of the secret evidence sessions when Incedal went on trial at the Old Bailey. The Guardian and other news organisations are now appealing against the trial judge’s refusal to let those journalists report what they heard.After an appeal from lawyers representing the media, arrangements were eventually made for a small group of journalists to be present during some of the secret evidence sessions when Incedal went on trial at the Old Bailey. The Guardian and other news organisations are now appealing against the trial judge’s refusal to let those journalists report what they heard.
Although much of the media’s appeal has itself been heard in secret, Thomas said that the constitutional implications of what had occurred were such that he needed to raise it in open court.Although much of the media’s appeal has itself been heard in secret, Thomas said that the constitutional implications of what had occurred were such that he needed to raise it in open court.
The representations that had been made by “the executive”, and the CPS response, “goes to the independence of the prosecutorial decision” and accountability for that decision, he said.The representations that had been made by “the executive”, and the CPS response, “goes to the independence of the prosecutorial decision” and accountability for that decision, he said.
“It is one of the really difficult constitutional issues that arises in this case.” Thomas added that he did not accept that there had been any proper analysis of what had happened, and that the appeal court needed to conduct that analysis.“It is one of the really difficult constitutional issues that arises in this case.” Thomas added that he did not accept that there had been any proper analysis of what had happened, and that the appeal court needed to conduct that analysis.
Lawyers for the media argue that there is a “powerful public interest” in the public being permitted to know what happened behind closed doors at the Old Bailey trial.Lawyers for the media argue that there is a “powerful public interest” in the public being permitted to know what happened behind closed doors at the Old Bailey trial.
Incedal, 27, from south London, was arrested in October 2013 after police shot out the tyres of his Mercedes when he was pulled over near Tower Bridge in central London. During the parts of his trial which were not held in secret, the jury heard that a listening device had been inserted inside the car 13 days earlier, capturing his conversations about jihadist groups, his supposed love of the word terrorism, and a plan that he had to purchase a gun.Incedal, 27, from south London, was arrested in October 2013 after police shot out the tyres of his Mercedes when he was pulled over near Tower Bridge in central London. During the parts of his trial which were not held in secret, the jury heard that a listening device had been inserted inside the car 13 days earlier, capturing his conversations about jihadist groups, his supposed love of the word terrorism, and a plan that he had to purchase a gun.
An examination of his laptop resulted in the recovery of communications with a British jihadist called Ahmed, who was encouraging him to carry out a terrorist attack.An examination of his laptop resulted in the recovery of communications with a British jihadist called Ahmed, who was encouraging him to carry out a terrorist attack.
Incedal was jailed for 42 months after being convicted of the possession of a bomb-making manual, which was found on a memory card hidden inside his iPhone case at the time of his arrest.Incedal was jailed for 42 months after being convicted of the possession of a bomb-making manual, which was found on a memory card hidden inside his iPhone case at the time of his arrest.
But one jury was unable to reach a verdict on the more serious charge of plotting a terrorist attack, and at a retrial, a second jury cleared him of the charge, despite being informed that he had already been convicted of possession of a bomb-making manual.But one jury was unable to reach a verdict on the more serious charge of plotting a terrorist attack, and at a retrial, a second jury cleared him of the charge, despite being informed that he had already been convicted of possession of a bomb-making manual.
Because of the way in which Incedal’s defence case, as well as much of the prosecution case, was held in secret, the media has been unable to explain why the jury reached its decision.Because of the way in which Incedal’s defence case, as well as much of the prosecution case, was held in secret, the media has been unable to explain why the jury reached its decision.
The media’s appeal has been adjourned until October, to give time for further examination of what happened at Incedal’s trials.The media’s appeal has been adjourned until October, to give time for further examination of what happened at Incedal’s trials.