Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Supreme Court may hear secret evidence

 

Terri Judd
Tuesday 19 March 2013 18:42 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The highest court in the land could soon consider secret evidence for the first time after a judgment late last tonight.

In a ruling on the politically charged issue of closed material procedures, the Supreme Court said that it had decided it could examine secret government evidence but would do so only if it deemed it absolutely necessary to the case in hand. It added that it had yet to be convinced that would be the case.

The decision of the highest judges in the UK is highly significant at a time when the Government's plans for secret courts have caused outrage among human-rights groups and led to several high-profile Liberal Democrat resignations.

The court, whose president, Lord Neuberger, has repeatedly emphasised the need for open justice, heard arguments as to whether it should consider secret evidence in the case of an Iranian bank, banned from trading with British companies under the Counter-Terrorism Act.

The controversial nature of the case was emphasised with the rare attendance of a full panel of nine Supreme Court justices.

Bank Mellat is appealing sanctions imposed by the Treasury in 2009, claiming it was unfairly accused of alleged links with Iran's nuclear- and ballistic-missile programmes and that the order is "irrational and disproportionate".

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in