The use of intercept evidence in court for the first time could be stalled by demands from the intelligence services for a right of veto over the use of the transcripts from their secret bugging operations. The CIA is also unhappy that its intercepted phone calls or conversations between suspected terrorists could be produced in British courts.
A report from a cross-party committee chaired by Sir John Chilcot supported in principle yesterday the use of intercept evidence in court, but the expected breakthrough failed to materialise as Gordon Brown made it clear the Government had still to overcome serious objections by the intelligence agencies. "There are considerable hurdles that need to be crossed," he said.
Civil rights campaigners were hoping that rapid progress in using bugging evidence in terrorist cases would end the Government's drive to extend detention without charge from 28 to 42 days. There were also hopes it would end the need for control orders imposing house arrest on suspects. But Downing Street said there was no connection between the need to extend detention without charge and use of intercept evidence. The Chilcot committee also said control orders would still be needed.
Mr Brown dampened hopes of rapid movement on legislation following the recommendations of the Chilcot committee, which included the former foreign secretary Douglas Hurd and the Liberal Democrat MP Alan Beith,.
The Prime Minister told MPs that he personally supported the idea of using intercept evidence in court cases, but he repeatedly stressed that a "considerable amount of more work needs to be done" before any legislation can be introduced. Downing Street confirmed it would not be added to the counter-terrorism Bill currently going through Parliament.
The Chilcot committee – far from giving the green light to the use of intercept evidence in court – wants MI5, MI6 and GCHQ to have the ability to retain control over whether material is used in prosecution.
The MPs also said they wanted to prevent disclosure of material if the agency responsible for producing it was against its being made public.
Mr Brown said yesterday they had called for assurances that the intelligence agencies would not be required to transcribe or make notes of material "beyond the standard of detail that the agencies deem necessary".
The intelligence services, who have consistently opposed disclosure of their telephone taps and bugged conversations in court, do not want to allow defence lawyers to require them to release entire transcripts.
Mr Brown said: "The report from Chilcot accepts a considerable amount of work needs to be done. They do not conclude that all the questions have been answered and that all it is lacking is political will. They conclude what we need to do is look at the legal and technical questions so the right balance is struck between liberty and security."
Ann Cryer, who is on the parliamentary committee which meets Mr Brown after Prime Minister's Questions, expressed Labour backbenchers' concern over the bugging of the Labour minister Sadiq Khan on a prison visit to a constituent, Babar Ahmad, accused by US agencies of terrorism.
The shadow Justice Secretary, Nick Herbert, wrote to Jack Straw, his government counterpart, challenging him over his late-night statement to the Commons on Tuesday denying all knowledge of the bugging of Mr Khan. Mr Straw had said he was aware in December of press inquiries about Mr Khan visiting Mr Ahmad but until Saturday he was not aware of the bugging allegations.
Comments