About this blog
-
A daily comment on what's in the news and what should be in the news, from the Amnesty media team.
Bloggers:
Search
Views voiced on these blogs are not necessarily Amnesty International's own
Recent Posts
People are writing about
''Secret Inquests' return - keeping grieving families in the dark
This afternoon, the House of Commons will debate the Coroners and Justice Bill. It looks like the UK government will use the Bill to further increase the secrecy that seems to be pervading some aspects of UK justice.
Public access is one of the most important aspects of coroners’ inquests in this country, and if someone dies at the hands of the state, their relatives have a right to know what happened. But Justice Secretary Jack Straw has already made one attempt to grant the government the power to order some inquests to be held in secret. After vocal criticism and defeat in the Lords, he dropped the plans.
Now it looks like he may have found a way round this. Amnesty is concerned that, using an amendment inserted into the Bill today, the government will grant itself the power to suspend any coroner’s inquest and replace it with a ‘secret inquiry’ under the 2005 Inquiries Act.
Inquiries under the 2005 Act are not ‘public’ or independent in any meaningful way, as they are largely controlled by the government minister that orders them. Bereaved relatives, journalists and the public could be excluded from part of the inquiry’s hearings. The final report of any inquiry under the Inquiries Act would be published at the discretion of the government minister, and crucial findings could be omitted at the minister’s say-so, “in the public interest”.
If the government gets its way today, the public will lose a vital means of holding the authorities to account.
There’s already been quite enough secrecy introduced into judicial procedures in this country. We’ve seen an increasing use of ‘secret intelligence’, which the defendant cannot see or challenge, being used as the basis on which to punish people with Control Orders. Following a recent judgement by the Law Lords that this undermines the right to a fair trial, lawyers are now mounting a fightback.
But if the amendment is passed to the Coroners and Justice Bill today, the potential for a culture of secrecy to pervade the inquests system will be greatly increased. No doubt the government will argue that they need such powers to protect national security – but as Robert Verkaik writes in The Independent, “national security has a nasty habit of covering government embarrassments….ministers would find it difficult to resist using a power to hold an inquest in secret if they knew evidence was to emerge showing that they had acted negligently.”
We can only hope that MPs, and the Lords who will then look again at the Bill, resist this creeping secrecy and ensure that bereaved families and the wider public are not kept in the dark.
Public access is one of the most important aspects of coroners’ inquests in this country, and if someone dies at the hands of the state, their relatives have a right to know what happened. But Justice Secretary Jack Straw has already made one attempt to grant the government the power to order some inquests to be held in secret. After vocal criticism and defeat in the Lords, he dropped the plans.
Now it looks like he may have found a way round this. Amnesty is concerned that, using an amendment inserted into the Bill today, the government will grant itself the power to suspend any coroner’s inquest and replace it with a ‘secret inquiry’ under the 2005 Inquiries Act.
Inquiries under the 2005 Act are not ‘public’ or independent in any meaningful way, as they are largely controlled by the government minister that orders them. Bereaved relatives, journalists and the public could be excluded from part of the inquiry’s hearings. The final report of any inquiry under the Inquiries Act would be published at the discretion of the government minister, and crucial findings could be omitted at the minister’s say-so, “in the public interest”.
If the government gets its way today, the public will lose a vital means of holding the authorities to account.
There’s already been quite enough secrecy introduced into judicial procedures in this country. We’ve seen an increasing use of ‘secret intelligence’, which the defendant cannot see or challenge, being used as the basis on which to punish people with Control Orders. Following a recent judgement by the Law Lords that this undermines the right to a fair trial, lawyers are now mounting a fightback.
But if the amendment is passed to the Coroners and Justice Bill today, the potential for a culture of secrecy to pervade the inquests system will be greatly increased. No doubt the government will argue that they need such powers to protect national security – but as Robert Verkaik writes in The Independent, “national security has a nasty habit of covering government embarrassments….ministers would find it difficult to resist using a power to hold an inquest in secret if they knew evidence was to emerge showing that they had acted negligently.”
We can only hope that MPs, and the Lords who will then look again at the Bill, resist this creeping secrecy and ensure that bereaved families and the wider public are not kept in the dark.
to add a hyperlink.
Add comment
1 Comment
12 November update-
Bad news yesterday, as the Lords failed to stop the government amending the Coroners and Justice Bill, which goes back to the Commons today for what's likely to be a rubber stamp. If the Bill is passed with the amendment, it means that the government will have the power to suspend an independent coroner's inquest and replace it instead with a ‘secret inquiry', one which ministers will have considerable control over.
The compromise that was struck was that the judge who presides over the inquiry will have to be approved by the Lord Chief Justice.
But given that the government will be able to exclude journalists and bereaved relatives from the inquiry, and censor its final report, this isn't going to make a lot of difference.