According to Wikipedia, the IPT upheld ten of 1468 complaints from 2000 to 2012. High standards of conduct, judicial probity and intellectual excellence do not inevitably lead to justice—we know this from, e.g., Singapore—and, whilst we cannot determine much sans access to classified data and rulings, this seems to be one of those cases. The problem with the IPT is probably not this sort of exploit, but rather its overall structure and the statutory framework within which it operates.
MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
11–16 of 16 posts
Re: MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
#12How has putin not been mentioned here? The judge must be a Putin asset to deny the spies requests! They're against Putin (Philby, Burgess, etc etc aside) so if the judge is against them he's Putin.
Oh you want evidence? That's not how Putin asset accusations work. Boris Johnson is currently being attacked for being Putin's. As is brexit. No evidence. Evidence of Russian meddling had largely evaporated, but hey. Putin is an awful human and Russia would be better off with someone kinder so WMD it all the way!
Re: MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my reading it seems they did not have the prerogatives or rights to ask this, it was an illegal demands but the apology was enough.
There was nothing illegal about their request. They shouldn't have done it, but they didn't break any laws in doing so.
My understanding is that expate communication with the judge or a judges staff in a court case is not legal (unless allowed under very specific situations).
Re: MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my reading it seems they did not have the prerogatives or rights to ask this, it was an illegal demands but the apology was enough.
There was nothing illegal about their request. They shouldn't have done it, but they didn't break any laws in doing so.
It not being illegal is not a good thing. Apparently evidence tampering is cool in the UK?
Re: MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
#15The scary consequences of overbearing "Classified" status assigned to information that human beings are embarrassed by is likely the single biggest omission to the public record thus denying the public the ability to form political opinions fairly.
Well said. It's scary how many thing that get classified that shouldn't be.
It's crafty mixing of real classified information with embarrassing information...
"The address of our safehouse is classified, but all the letters we send eachother have the address on the top, therefore all these letters are classified."
Re: MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was nothing illegal about their request. They shouldn't have done it, but they didn't break any laws in doing so.
It not being illegal is not a good thing. Apparently evidence tampering is cool in the UK?
I never said it was a good thing — of course evidence tampering is utterly unacceptable. The systems here simply hew closely to expected standards of behaviour from institutions, and in any event there are a range of mechanisms to address the behaviour without needing to criminalise it.