Home Secretary Charles Clarke has committed a serious gaffe which could endanger some of the most high-profile terrorist prosecutions yet seen in Britain.
In a bid to win backing for new terror powers he distributed a seven-page Scotland Yard document which contained details of three terrorist cases which are currently sub-judice.
The contents of the case studies cannot be repeated in full because they would amount to contempt of court. But they included details of evidence against a number of defendants and their behaviour in police interviews.
One of the cases highlighted by Scotland Yard has been described by a senior legal source as the biggest terror prosecution ever mounted in the UK.
The Met's briefing note was drawn up by Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, who is in charge of the anti-terrorist branch, in a bid to explain why police need powers to detain terror suspects for up to three months before charge.
Asked why they had issued a document which could potentially endanger the prosecutions, a Home Office spokesman said: "The Metropolitan Police are responsible for that document.
"The Met have assured us that they intended this document for public consumption. We can only, therefore, presume that the Met have cleared it legally."
The Home Office distributed the Met's document to MPs, peers and journalists. Headings of each case study stated "This case is sub judice and it would therefore be inappropriate to release further details" but then went on to include information banned from publication ahead of a trial by the 1981 Contempt of Court Act.
Media lawyer Rod Dadak said: "I would be most surprised if, in issuing a release seeking to justify new detention powers, any reference would be made to a case which has yet to come to trial. It is inappropriate to do so and clearly calls into question the risk of prejudicing a fair trial."
He added: "The detail they have given impacts on the conduct of the defendants, which would appear to breach the rules with regard to contempt."
From ananova
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment