Has there in fact been a decision by the High Court of Justiciary on the Foreign Secretary’s claim of public interest immunity (PII) in the Lockerbie appeal? It has been suggested to me (from a source claiming that the information came from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office) that at the closed hearing that took place on 19 August 2008 the court ordered that a summary of the documents in question (prepared by whom?) should be given to a “special counsel” (with what qualifications, and appointed by whom?) and not to Abdelbaset Megrahi’s chosen legal team.
If this information is accurate, two important questions need to be asked. They are: 1. Is it satisfactory, or tolerable, that such a decision be taken at a court hearing from which the appellant and his legal representatives are excluded? 2. Is it satisfactory, or tolerable, that no opinion is published by the court announcing its decision and explaining the reasons for it?
I think kangaroo trial is the right description. A sham that denies due process rights in the name of expediency. Such rights include the right not to be tried on secret evidence, the right to control one's own defense, the right to exclude evidence that is improperly obtained, irrelevant or inherently inadmissible (e.g. hearsay), the right to exclude judges or jurors on the grounds of partiality or conflict of interest, and the right of appeal. The outcome of a trial by "kangaroo court" is essentially determined in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately in England kangaroo courts are quite common in government sensitive cases particularly VAT and excise fraud cases.
YET AGAIN this site has raised a vital question as to the administration of 'justice' in this case.
ReplyDeleteThe Defence was NOT allowed to be present at the 'closed hearing' wherein the Crown made submissions to the court regrading the 'protected information'.
Now, we are lead to beleive that their Lordship have decided to appoint a secret 'assessor' to report to them.... and yet their decision has not been publicly announced...
Somuchfor 'equality of arms'... whether truth... what chance justice?
Secret hearings with secret assessors to discuss secret information. "Murder most foul, as in the best it is; But this most foul, strange, and unnatural."
ReplyDelete